论文部分内容阅读
目的比较不同铸造固定式功能矫治器矫正青少年骨性Ⅱ类错的临床疗效。方法选取2014年5月至2015年10月湖北省中西医结合医院口腔科收治的青少年骨性Ⅱ类错患者36例,在征得患者及家属知情同意情况下随机将其分为研究组及对照组各18例。研究组采取铸造固定双垫功能矫治器矫正治疗,对照组采取铸造Herbst功能矫治器矫正治疗。在正畸治疗前和功能矫治完成后对每位患者拍摄X线头颅侧位片,对其治疗前后的头影测量值变化情况进行比较。同时,比较两组患者椅旁操作时间的差异。结果两组患者治疗前后的头影测量值变化情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05);总椅旁操作时间比较,研究组与对照组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论铸造固定双垫功能矫治器矫正治疗骨性Ⅱ类错效果与铸造Herbst功能矫治器相当,但临床操作上前者明显比后者更简便。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of different cast-immobilized functional appliances in the treatment of skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion in adolescents. Methods From May 2014 to October 2015, 36 cases of skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion in adolescents admitted to Department of Stomatology, Hubei Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine were randomly divided into study group and control group with informed consent of patients and their relatives. The control group of 18 cases. The study group was treated with cast immobilization double pad appliance and the control group was treated with cast Herbst appliance. Before orthodontic treatment and after functional correction, X-ray cephalometric films were taken for each patient, and the change of cephalometric changes before and after treatment were compared. At the same time, the differences of operating time between two groups of patients were compared. Results There was no significant difference between the two groups before and after treatment (P> 0.05). There was significant difference between study group and control group (P <0.05) . Conclusion Cast immobilization double pad functional appliance correction treatment of skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion effect and casting Herbst functional appliance, but the clinical operation of the former is significantly easier than the latter.