论文部分内容阅读
目的观察并比较Tip-Edge plus差动直丝弓技术和MBT滑动直丝弓技术治疗成人安氏Ⅱ~1类错的效果。方法根据纳入标准选择安氏Ⅱ~1类错畸形患者40例,随机分成两组。试验组20例采用Tip-Edge plus矫治器,对照组20例采用MBT矫治器配合中等支抗进行治疗。治疗前后拍摄头颅侧位片并测量,进行成组和配对t检验。结果 (1)未使用额外支抗的试验组与使用中等支抗的对照组取得相似的软硬组织改变效果,两组上磨牙前移量无统计学差异,试验组矫治后下切牙唇倾度大于对照组。(2)试验组打开咬合平均需3.8个月,平均复诊次数为16次;对照组打开咬合平均6.3个月,平均复诊次数为22次,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论对于需要使用中度支抗的成人安氏Ⅱ1类错患者应用Tip-Edge plus技术和MBT滑动直丝弓技术矫正能取得相似的软硬组织改变效果、支抗效果,但Tip-Edge plus技术打开咬合时间短,能减少复诊次数。
Objective To observe and compare the effects of Tip-Edge plus differential linear arch technique and MBT sliding linear arch technique in treating Class Ⅱ-1 malocclusion in adults. Methods According to the inclusion criteria, 40 patients with Class Ⅱ ~ 1 malformation deformity were randomly divided into two groups. Twenty patients in the test group were treated with Tip-Edge plus appliance and 20 patients in the control group were treated with MBT appliance with moderate support. Before and after treatment, the cephalometric films were taken and measured, and the groups and paired t-tests were performed. Results (1) The results of similar changes of soft and hard tissue in the test group without additional support and in the control group with moderate support showed no significant difference in the displacement of the molar between the two groups. The incisors’ incisors Greater than the control group. (2) The average time for opening the bite in the experimental group was 3.8 months, the average number of referrals was 16 times. In the control group, the average time for opening bite was 6.3 months and the average number of referrals was 22, with significant difference (P <0.05). Conclusion Tip-Edge plus and MBT straightening techniques can achieve similar effects of both soft and hard tissue modification and support in patients with Class Ⅱ 1 malocclusion who require moderate support. However, Tip-Edge plus Technology to open the bite a short time, can reduce the number of referrals.