论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较两种取模方法制作全瓷高嵌体的临床效果。方法:将80例根管治疗后需做高嵌体的患者随机采用数字印模法或弹性材料印模法获取印模制作高嵌体,分别记录取模时间、患者舒适度。1周后试戴嵌体记录修复体适合度及调改时间,进行临床效果比较。采用SPSS 18.0统计学软件进行数据处理。结果:数字印模组取模时间明显短于弹性印模材料组(P<0.05);取模时患者舒适度亦有明显差异(P<0.05);制作的修复体适合度及调改时间两组没有明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:数字印模具有取模速度快、方便、临床体验好、精确度高的优点,能较好地满足制作修复体对印模的要求,值得临床推广。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects of two models in making all-ceramic inlays. Methods: Eighty patients with high inlay after root canal treatment were randomly selected using digital impression or elastic impression to obtain impression inlay. The acquisition time and patient comfort were recorded respectively. One week later, in-suit intima-media restoration fit and adjustment time were compared, and the clinical effects were compared. Data was processed using SPSS 18.0 statistical software. Results: The impression time of the digital impression was significantly shorter than that of the elastic impression material (P <0.05), and the comfort of the model was also significantly different (P <0.05). The fitness and time of the restoration There was no significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05). Conclusion: Digital impression has the advantages of fast modality, convenience, good clinical experience and high precision, which can well meet the requirements of impression making for prosthesis and is worthy of clinical promotion.