一次性全口龈下刮治和分象限龈下刮治对慢性牙周炎疗效的比较研究

摘要

目的:比较一次性全口龈下刮治(full-mouth scaling and root planning,FM-SRP)与分象限龈下刮治(quadrant scaling and root planning,Q-SRP)对慢性牙周炎的临床疗效.方法:选择需进行牙周治疗的慢性牙周炎患者54例,分为FM -SRP组27例和Q-SRP组27例进行治疗,观察治疗前、治疗3,6个月后牙周探诊深度(Probing Depth,PD)、牙周附着水平(Attachment Level,AL)、探诊后出血(Bleeding on Probing,BOP)的变化,并记录患者术后疼痛(VAS)评分和止痛药使用情况及术后是否有发热症状.结果:两组龈下刮治后3,6个月后PD、AL、BOP均较治疗前改善,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)；但两组治疗后上述指标相比差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).术后FM-SRP组VAS评分高于Q-SRP组(P＜0.05)；术后两组均有患者出现发热症状,但两组平均体温差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论:FM-SRP和Q-SRP均可获得良好的临床疗效,但FM-SRP术后全身反应稍明显,临床医生可根据患者实际情况选择适宜的治疗方式.%Objective: To evaluate the effect of full-mouth scaling and root planning with quadrant scaling and root planning on chronic periodontitis. Methods: Fifty-four patients had finished super-scaling were divided into 2 groups, FM-SRP group administrated full-mouth scaling at one time, and Q-SRP group divided full-month into four quadrant to finish scaling and root planning at four times. Probing depth (PD), bleeding on probe (BOP) and attachment level (AL) were examined, if patient had uncomfortable and fever also was collected. Results: Both treatment modalityes led to significant clinical improvement at any time. After 3 and 6 months, PD, AL and BOP of two groups both decreased significantly but there was no difference between two groups. As compared with Q-SRP group, visual analogue scale (VAS) of the FM-SRP group was significantly increased after treatment. Fever in both groups was occurred but there was no difference in mean body temperature between the two groups. Conclusion: FM-SRP and Q-SRP both could decrease periodontal inflammation, FM-SRP did not provide clinically relevant advantages over Q-SRP, but FM-SRP could increase uncomfortable after treatment. The clinician should select the treatment modality based on practical considerations related to patient preference and clinical workload.