比较奥齿泰种植和常规方法在牙齿缺失修复中临床效果.docVIP

比较奥齿泰种植和常规方法在牙齿缺失修复中临床效果 　　[摘要] 目的 探讨传统常规镶牙方法与奥齿泰种植修复牙齿缺失的两种方法的临床疗效。方法 方便选取2011年1月―2014年12月该院口腔科门诊患者中选择需要修复的牙齿缺失患者79例，把这79例患者作为研究对象，随机分成两组，对照组患者39例，观察组患者40例。对照组患者进行传统常规方法镶牙修复，观察组患者进行奥齿泰种植修复。对两组患者统计治疗满意度，临床美观功能疗效，舒适度，随访结果进行对比观察。 结果 观察组患者治疗总有效率[92.5%（37/40）]明显优于对照组[82.1%（32/39）]（P0.05）；观察组患者对治疗的满意度[97.5%（39/40）]明显高于对照组[82.1%（32/39）]（P0.05）；经过6～24个月随访调查，观察组患者临床美观功能效果和舒适度明显优于对照组（P0.05）。结论 采用奥齿泰种植技术对牙列缺损种植修复的临床效果更佳，可有效提升种植成功率，减少术后牙龈出血、牙痛等症状，提高牙齿美观，改善咀嚼功能，建议对牙列缺损进行采用奥齿泰植体种植修复。 　　[关键词] 种植修复技术；常规修复；临床疗效 　　[中图分类号] R783 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2017）08（c）-0065-03 　　Comparison of Clinical Effect of Dental Prosthetics Method and Routine Method in Repairing the Tooth Loss 　　CHEN Yong-jun， WANG Xiang 　　Department of Stomatology， Nantong First People’s Hospital，Nantong，Jiangsu Province，226001 China 　　[Abstract] Objective To compare the clinical curative effect of routine dental prosthetics method and OSSTEM planting in repairing the tooth loss. Methods Convenient selection 79 cases of patients with tooth loss needing repair in our hospital from January 2011 to December 2014 were selected as the research objects and randomly divided into two groups， the control group with 39 cases adopted the traditional routine dental prosthetics method for repair， while the observation group adopted the OSSTEM planting， and the treatment satisfactory degree， clinical beauty function curative effect， comfort degree and follow-up results were compared and observed. Results The total effective rate in the observation group was obviously better than that in the control group， [92.5%（37/40）vs 82.1%（32/39）]（P0.05）， and the treatment satisfactory degree in the observation group was obviously higher than that in the control group， [97.5%（39/40）vs 82.1%（32/39）]（P0.05）， after the follow-up of six months to two years， the clinical beauty function effect and comfort degree in the observation group were obviously better than those in the control group（P0.05）. Conclusion The clinical effect of OSSTEM