口腔种植修复与常规固定义齿修复治疗牙列缺失的效果比较

详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |

英文篇名：Comparison of oral implant restoration and conventional repair for dentition loss 作者：石海 英文作者：Shi Hai;Inner Mongolia Hangjin Houqi Hospital; 关键词：口腔种植修复 ; 固定义齿修复 ; 牙列缺损 英文关键词：Oral implant restoration;;routine repair;;dentition loss 中文刊名：QKKQ 英文刊名：Electronic Journal of General Stomatology 机构：内蒙古杭锦后旗医院; 出版日期：2019-07-26 出版单位：全科口腔医学电子杂志 年：2019 期：v.6 语种：中文; 页：QKKQ201923007 页数：2 CN：23 ISSN：11-9337/R 分类号：23+39

摘要

目的对于牙列缺损患者分别应用两种不同的修复方法治疗,一种是种植义齿修复;另一种是固定义齿修复,然后比较两种修复方法的治疗效果。方法从2018年1月开始至2019年1月结束,在我院选择了100位牙列缺失的患者作为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组和观察组各50例,进行研究分析。在对照组患者中应用固定义齿修复治疗,观察组中采用种植义齿修复缺失的牙齿。结果对照组中患者的修复治疗总有效率为72.00%,观察组中患者的修复治疗有效率为98.00%,相比较而言,观察组患者的治疗总有效率显著较高(P<0.05)。结论对于牙列缺损患者中应用口腔种植修复实施治疗的效果显著优于固定义齿修复治疗,可在临床中推广应用。
        Objective To compare the effects of two different restoration methods for patients with dentition defect, one is implant denture, the other is fixed denture.Methods From January 2018 to January 2019,100 patients with dentition loss were randomly divided into control group and observation group,50 cases in each group.Fixed dentures were used in the control group and implant dentures were used in the observation group to repair missing teeth.Results The total effective rate of the patients in the control group was 72.00%,and that in the observation group was 98.00%.Compared with the control group,the total effective rate of the patients in the observation group was significantly higher(P<0.05).Conclusion The effect of dental implant prosthesis is better than fixed denture prosthesis in the treatment of patients with dentition defect, and it can be widely used in clinic.

引文

[1]徐炜.口腔种植修复与常规修复治疗牙列缺失的临床效果[J].中国社区医师,2018,34(13):31-32.
    [2]刘佳.口腔种植修复与常规修复治疗牙列缺失的效果比较[J].全科口腔医学电子杂志,2018,5(12):32+34.
    [3]朱旭,宋君.口腔种植修复与常规修复治疗牙列缺失的临床疗效分析[J].中国继续医学教育,2018,10(11):105-106.