...
首页> 外文期刊>International Poster Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine >Decision Regret after Opting for Pain Control for Scaling and Root Planing
【24h】

Decision Regret after Opting for Pain Control for Scaling and Root Planing

机译:选择缩放和根计划的疼痛控制后的决策遗憾

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

88 patients opted for anaesthesia, 73 (83%) of them for GEL and 15 (17%) for INJ.DRS values were noticeably low and comparable between the groups (p>.05).Overall, patients were satisfied with their choice (98%), reported no regret (94%), and would take the same decision for future treatments (96%). Additionally, they valued their choice as smart (97%) and not harmful (97%).These outcomes were consistent for the subgroups, showing no intragroup differences (p>.05).Distribution of anaesthesia choice was affected by treatment point (p=.000) and number of teeth treated (p=0.000). 80% choosing INJ underwent anti-infective therapy, 65% opting for GEL received retreatment during supportive therapy.Procedural pain during SRP was distributed equally between the groups (p>.05), with an overall mean of 20.5?23.0 and a range between 0 to 90. Future choice of pain control was not influenced by procedural pain (p=.155).
机译:88例患者选择了麻醉,其中73例(83%)进行了GEL,15例(17%)进行了麻醉。两组之间的DRS值很低且可比(p> .05)。总体而言,患者对他们的选择感到满意( 98%的受访者表示没有后悔(94%),并且会为以后的治疗做出相同的决定(96%)。此外,他们认为他们的选择是明智的(97%)而无害(97%)。这些结果在亚组中是一致的,没有组内差异(p> .05)。麻醉选择的分布受治疗点的影响(p = .000)和治疗的牙齿数量(p = 0.000)。选择INJ的患者中有80%接受了抗感染治疗,选择了GEL的患者中有65%接受了支持治疗。SRP的过程性疼痛在两组之间平均分布(p> .05),总体平均值为20.5?23.0,范围在0到90。将来控制疼痛的选择不受程序性疼痛的影响(p = .155)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号