【24h】

Rigidity of commonly used dental trauma splints.

机译:常用的牙科创伤夹板的刚性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The stability of immobilization devices varies from flexible to rigid, depending on the trauma. We evaluated the rigidity of various commonly used splints in vitro MATERIAL AND METHODS: An acrylic resin model was used. The central incisors simulated injured teeth, with increased vertical and horizontal mobility. The lateral incisors and canines stimulated uninjured teeth. Tooth mobility was measured with the Periotest device. Vertical and horizontal measurements were made before and after splinting, and the difference between values was defined as the splint effect. We evaluated 4 composite splints, 3 wire-composite splints, a titanium trauma splint, a titanium ring splint, a bracket splint, and 2 Schuchardt splints RESULTS: For all injured teeth and all splints, there was a significant splint effect for the vertical and horizontal dimensions (P < 0.05). For injured teeth, the composite splints produced the largest changes in vertical tooth mobility; wire-composite splints 1 and 2, using orthodontic wires, produced the smallest vertical splint effects. For uninjured teeth, the Schuchardt 1 splint and the bracket splint produced the largest splint effects; wire-composite splints 1 and 2 produced only a slight change in tooth mobility. Composite splints 2 and 3 produced the largest horizontal splint effects for injured teeth, and the 4 composite splints produced the largest horizontal splint effects for uninjured teeth. The most horizontally flexible splints were the titanium trauma splint and wire-composite splints 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: According to the current guidelines and within the limits of an in vitro study, it can be stated that flexible or semirigid splints such as the titanium trauma splint and wire-composite splints 1 and 2 are appropriate for splinting teeth with dislocation injuries and root fractures, whereas rigid splints such as wire-composite splint 3 and the titanium ring splint can be used to treat alveolar process fractures.
机译:背景/目的:固定装置的稳定性从柔性到刚性,取决于创伤。我们在体外评估了各种常用夹板的刚度。材料和方法:使用丙烯酸树脂模型。中切牙模拟了受伤的牙齿,垂直和水平移动性增加。侧切牙和犬齿刺激了未受伤的牙齿。用Periotest设备测量牙齿的活动性。在夹板之前和之后进行垂直和水平测量,并且将值之间的差定义为夹板效果。我们评估了4个复合夹板,3个金属丝复合夹板,钛外伤夹板,钛环夹板,支架夹板和2个Schuchardt夹板。结果:对于所有受伤的牙齿和所有夹板,垂直和垂直夹板都有明显的夹板效果。水平尺寸(P <0.05)。对于受伤的牙齿,复合夹板在垂直牙齿移动性方面产生了最大的变化。使用正畸钢丝的钢丝复合夹板1和2产生的垂直夹板效果最小。对于未受伤的牙齿,Schuchardt 1夹板和托槽夹板产生最大的夹板效果。钢丝复合夹板1和2在牙齿活动度方面仅产生了微小变化。复合夹板2和3对受伤的牙齿产生最大的水平夹板效果,而4种复合夹板对未受伤的牙齿产生最大的水平夹板效果。水平挠性最强的夹板是钛制创伤夹板和金属丝复合夹板1和2。结论:根据当前指南,在体外研究的范围内,可以说挠性或半刚性夹板(例如钛制创伤板)夹板和钢丝复合夹板1和2适用于牙合脱位和牙根骨折的夹板,而刚性夹板(例如钢丝复合夹板3和钛环夹板)可用于治疗牙槽突骨折。

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