Mash L K, Miller B H, Nakajima H, Collard S M, Guo I Y, Okabe T
Department of Restorative Sciences, Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Texas 75246.
J Dent. 1993 Dec;21(6):350-4. doi: 10.1016/0300-5712(93)90010-n.
The handling characteristics of a gallium alloy (Gallium Alloy GF) were compared to those of a spherical high-copper amalgam (Tytin). Ten dentists each restored four identical MO preparations in acrylic typodont teeth (no. 30), two with amalgam and two with gallium alloy. Each restoration was evaluated immediately following completion by the operator for six clinically relevant criteria. Each criterion was scored between 1 and 5, where 1 = very poor, 2 = poor, 3 = fair, 4 = good, and 5 = very good. Three two-sided Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the median scores for significant differences (P < 0.05). The first test indicated no significant difference between scores for the first- and second-placed restorations, within criteria and within alloy type (n = 10). The second test indicated a significant difference between amalgam and gallium alloy, within criteria and within restoration sequence (n = 10), for each criterion except resistance to fracture during removal of the matrix band. The third test indicated a significant difference between amalgam and gallium alloy, within each criteria, combining scores for first- and second-placed restorations (n = 20). During simulated clinical placement, amalgam was rated significantly higher than gallium alloy in each handling characteristic evaluated.
将一种镓合金(镓合金GF)的操作特性与一种球形高铜汞合金(Tytin)的操作特性进行了比较。十名牙医分别在丙烯酸类牙模型(30号)上对四个相同的近中邻面(MO)洞型进行修复,其中两个用汞合金修复,两个用镓合金修复。每个修复体完成后,由操作人员立即根据六项临床相关标准进行评估。每项标准的评分在1至5分之间,其中1 = 非常差,2 = 差,3 = 一般,4 = 好,5 = 非常好。使用三次双侧曼-惠特尼检验来比较中位数分数,以确定是否存在显著差异(P < 0.05)。第一次检验表明,在标准范围内以及合金类型内,第一名和第二名修复体的分数之间没有显著差异(n = 10)。第二次检验表明,在标准范围内以及修复顺序内,除去除基质带时的抗折性外,汞合金和镓合金在每项标准上均存在显著差异(n = 10)。第三次检验表明,在每项标准内,将第一名和第二名修复体的分数合并后,汞合金和镓合金之间存在显著差异(n = 20)。在模拟临床放置过程中,在评估的各项操作特性方面,汞合金的评分均显著高于镓合金。