论文部分内容阅读
目的本研究主要用于评估和比较单独使用酸蚀法与联合使用空气喷磨技术及酸蚀法对窝沟封闭剂保留率的影响。方法 34组6~8岁儿童纳入研究。分区设计以封闭第2乳磨牙和第1恒磨牙的牙面。右侧(上颌及下颌)磨牙(组A)经酸蚀法处理,左侧(上颌及下颌)磨牙(组B)经空气喷磨预处理后再经酸蚀法处理。窝沟封闭术3~6个月后用封闭剂保留率评价相应牙面处理法的疗效。结果3个月及六个月随访显示组A和组B间窝沟封闭剂的保留率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。乳牙和恒牙窝沟封闭剂的保留率也无显著差异(P>0.05)。在3个月和6个月后,上颌磨牙封闭剂保留率较下颌磨牙高,且差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 3个月及六个月随访显示联合使用空气喷磨预处理后酸蚀法与单独使用酸蚀法在第2乳磨牙和恒磨牙窝沟封闭术中无明显差别。
Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of acid etching alone with air jet milling and acid etching on the retention of pit and fissure sealants. Methods 34 children aged 6 to 8 years were included in the study. Partition design to close the second molars and the first permanent molars tooth surface. The right (maxillary and mandibular) molars (group A) were treated by acid etching and the left (maxillary and mandibular) molars (group B) were air-spray pretreated and then acid-etched. Pit and fissure occlusion 3 to 6 months after the use of sealant retention rate evaluation of the corresponding effect of dental treatment. Results The follow-up at 3 months and 6 months showed no significant difference in the retention rate of pit and fissure sealant between group A and group B (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in the retention rate of deciduous teeth and permanent pit pit fissure sealants (P> 0.05). At 3 months and 6 months, the retention rate of maxillary molar sealant was higher than that of mandibular molar, and the difference was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusion The follow-up at 3 months and 6 months showed no significant difference between acid etching method and acid etching method in the combined use of air jet pretreatment for the second molars and permanent molars.