...
首页> 外文期刊>The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry >A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Conventional And Computer-Assisted Implant Planning and Placement in Partially Edentulous Patients. Part 2: Patient Related Outcome Measures
【24h】

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Conventional And Computer-Assisted Implant Planning and Placement in Partially Edentulous Patients. Part 2: Patient Related Outcome Measures

机译:随机对照临床试验比较常规和计算机辅助植入物规划和放置在部分薄弱的患者中。 第2部分:患者相关的结果措施

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The objective of this study was to compare patient-related outcomes of conventional protocols with computer-assisted implant planning and template-guided implant placement (CAIPP) protocols. Partially edentulous patients (N = 73) were assigned to either surgical planning based on two-dimensional radiographs and freehand implant placement (control; n = 26) or using three-dimensional computer-tomography data and implant placement using a tooth-supported surgical guide (test groups T1 [n = 24] and T2 [n = 23]). The two test groups differed from each other in digital data acquisition, software functionality, and the guide-manufacturing process. All surgeries were performed as open-flap procedures. Patient-related outcome measures were evaluated using questionnaires. Statistical tests were performed to investigate differences between treatment groups. Before treatment, 53% of patients in the control group and 83% of patients in the test groups (T1: 88%, T2: 78%) were satisfied with their group allocation. In the control group, 37% of patients favored CAIPP technology, while only 11% in the test groups would have preferred a conventional procedure. After treatment, 50% of patients in the control and 86% in the test groups (T1: 76%, 72: 94%) were satisfied with their allocation. Twenty-one percent of control-group patients favored the CAIPP treatment, while 6% of the test-group patients would have preferred a conventional treatment. The quality-of-life parameters during and after surgery did not show significant differences between groups. More postoperative discomfort was reported after longer and more-complex surgeries including guided bone regeneration and surgeries with two surgical sites. Generally, patients preferred computer-based technologies. No differences in the intra- or postoperative discomfort were observed compared to control protocols. More-extensive surgical procedures negatively affected the intra-and postoperative quality of life, irrespective of the treatment group allocation.
机译:本研究的目的是将常规协议与计算机辅助植入计划和模板引导植入物放置(CAPPIP)协议的患者相关结果进行比较。基于二维射线照相和自由手套放置(对照; n = 26)或使用三维计算机断层扫描数据和使用牙齿支持的外科手术指南,分配给外科患者(n = 73)。使用三维计算机断层扫描数据和植入物放置(测试组T1 [n = 24]和T2 [n = 23])。两个测试组在数字数据采集,软件功能和指南制造过程中彼此不同。所有手术都作为开放式手术程序进行。使用问卷评估患者相关的结果措施。进行统计测试以研究治疗组之间的差异。在治疗之前,对照组53%的患者和83%的试验组患者(T1:88%,T2:78%)对其组分配感到满足。在对照组中,37%的患者赞成CAPP技术,而测试组只有11%的患者将首选传统程序。治疗后,对照组50%的患者和86%的试验组(T1:76%,72:94%)对其分配满足。二十一度百分之一的对照组患者有利于CAPP治疗,而6%的试验组患者将首选常规治疗。手术期间和后的寿命质量参数在组之间没有显示出显着的差异。经过更长且更复杂的手术,包括带有两个手术部位的引导骨再生和手术,更多的术后不适。通常,患者优先考虑基于计算机的技术。与对照方案相比,观察到或术后不适的差异。无论治疗组分配如何,更广泛的外科手术会产生负面影响和术后水平的生活质量。

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