目的：通过研究3种方法记录颌位关系的全口义齿再修复患者义齿调(牙合)量的差异，为此类患者探寻最佳颌位记录方法，并为临床提供参考。方法随机选择20名全口义齿再修复患者，采用自身对照的研究，对患者分别采用直接咬合法、哥特式弓描记法、哥特式弓联合面弓转移颌位关系法制作3副全口义齿，并比较不同方法在调(牙合)前后覆(牙合)、覆盖的差异。结果用哥特式弓联合面弓转移颌位关系法制作的全口义齿调(牙合)前后覆(牙合)、覆盖的变量差异大于直接咬合法及哥特式弓描记法，其差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。直接咬合法与哥特式弓描记法转移颌位关系法之间无明显差异（P>0.05）。结论使用哥特式弓描记法与哥特式弓联合面弓转移颌位关系法确定的颌位更符合生理功能，为全口义齿再修复患者提供更可靠的颌位记录方法，提高医生的工作效率和患者的满意度。%Objective The differences in the occlusional grinding among various methods of jaw relationship recording in complete denture replacement were compared to determine the most reliable method to provide references for clinical practice. Methods With the use of randomized self-controlled trial, 20 patients were selected and subjected to complete denture replacement. Three methods of jaw relationship recording were used for each patient: direct interocclusal records, gothic arch tracing, and gothic arch tracing combined with face-bow. Subsequently, the overbite and the overjet of the complete dentures under the three methods were compared before and after occlusion grinding. Results Data from gothic arch tracing combined with face-bow were significantly smaller than those from direct interocclusal records or gothic arch tracing(P<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between direct interocclusal records and gothic arch tracing(P>0.05). Conclusion Jaw relationship recording by gothic arch tracing and gothic arch tracing combined with face-bow were more in line with physiological function and considered as the most reliable methods in complete denture replacement. These methods could improve the working efficiency of dentists and increase patient satisfaction.
展开▼
