Cross-Poline G N, Stach D J, Newman S M
UCHSC School of Dentistry, Department of Dental Hygiene, Denver, CO 80262, USA.
Am J Dent. 1995 Jun;8(3):131-3.
To compare the effect on root surfaces of three ultrasonic scalers to each other and to a periodontal curet.
Forty extracted teeth were washed and embedded in acrylic resin leaving one entire coronal-apical tooth aspect exposed. The teeth were divided between four treatments: piezoelectric A - Group A, piezoelectric B - Group B, magnetostrictive - Group C, hand instrumentation with a curet - Group D. A single experienced operator simulated clinical instrumentation over a 9 mm square area on each tooth until the surface was judged smooth by the operator. Three evaluations were used in the study: (1) root tracings with a surface roughness meter to determine the roughness average (Ra) and roughness maximum (Rmax) in microns, (2) use of a new EXD 11/12 explorer to assess planed roots and (3) visual evaluation of the root surfaces through a stereoscopic microscope (X 20). During examinations 2 and 3, root surfaces were assigned to one of four "smoothness categories" by the examiners. Data for evaluation 1 was analyzed by ANOVA. Data from evaluations 2 and 3 were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test.
The mean Ra and Rmax were not significantly different between the four groups. The results from both clinicians' examinations showed a significant difference in the four groups (P=0.001). The curet produced the smoothest surfaces, the two piezoelectric instruments produced the next smoothest surface and the magnetostrictive instrument the least smooth root surfaces.
比较三种超声洁治器对牙根表面的影响,并与牙周刮治器进行对比。
40颗拔除的牙齿经清洗后嵌入丙烯酸树脂,使整个牙冠至牙根的一个面暴露在外。将牙齿分为四组进行处理:压电A组 - A组、压电B组 - B组、磁致伸缩组 - C组、用刮治器进行手工器械操作组 - D组。由一名经验丰富的操作人员在每颗牙齿上9平方毫米的区域模拟临床器械操作,直至操作人员判断表面光滑为止。本研究采用了三项评估:(1)用表面粗糙度仪进行牙根描记,以确定微米级的粗糙度平均值(Ra)和粗糙度最大值(Rmax);(2)使用新型EXD 11/12探针评估平整后的牙根;(3)通过立体显微镜(放大20倍)对牙根表面进行视觉评估。在检查2和检查3过程中,检查人员将牙根表面分为四个“光滑度类别”之一。评估1的数据采用方差分析进行分析。评估2和评估3的数据采用Kruskal-Wallis非参数检验进行分析。
四组之间的平均Ra和Rmax无显著差异。两位临床医生的检查结果均显示四组之间存在显著差异(P = 0.001)。刮治器产生的表面最光滑,两种压电器械产生的表面次之光滑,磁致伸缩器械产生的牙根表面最不光滑。