论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较无压力初印模技术与传统初印模技术制取出下颌初模型边缘与内、外斜线的距离及磨牙后垫的形态。方法:20名无牙颌志愿者分别使用无压初印模和传统初印模2种技术为同一志愿者制作2副试验用初模型,分别测量模型内斜线、外斜线到模型边缘的距离及观测磨牙后垫的形态。结果:无压力印模组初模型边缘至内斜线的距离(2.33±0.83)mm比压力组(2.70±0.72)mm明显减小,至外斜线的距离(4.37±0.87)mm比压力组(4.41±0.70)mm也明显减小;其差异具有统计学意义(P=0.000)。无压印模技术制取的初印模磨牙后垫的形变小于传统印模技术。结论:无压初印模制取的初模型边缘伸展更合适,更有利于全口义齿的下一步制作,是值得在临床中推广的技术。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the distance between the edge of the primary mandibular model and the internal and external oblique lines and the morphology of the posterior molars by comparing the no-pressure incision technique and the traditional incision technique. Methods: Twenty edentulous volunteers were used to make two initial test models for the same volunteer using the two methods of no-pressure primary impression and traditional primary impression, respectively. Distance and observation of molars after the pad shape. RESULTS: The distance from the edge of the incontinence pattern to the internal oblique line (2.33 ± 0.83) mm was significantly lower than that of the pressure group (2.70 ± 0.72) mm and the distance from the external oblique line was 4.37 ± 0.87 mm (4.41 ± 0.70) mm was also significantly reduced; the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). Impression mold technology to prepare the first impression after the deformation of the molar pad less than the traditional stamping technology. CONCLUSION: It is more appropriate to extend the edge of the primary model when no pressure is applied to the first impression, which is more conducive to the next step of complete denture. It is worth popularizing in the clinic.