口腔正畸固定矫治技术与牙弓夹板两种方法治疗牙槽突骨折的临床疗效探讨

Study on Clinical Curative Effect of Orthodontic Fixed Appliances and Arch Bar in Treatment of Fracture of Alveolar Process

目的探讨口腔正畸固定矫治技术与牙弓夹板两种方法治疗牙槽突骨折的临床疗效,为治疗牙槽突骨折提供切实可行的参考意见。方法方便选取济阳中医院2015年1月—2016年2月收治的84例牙槽突骨折的患者,将其随机分为研究组和对照组。研究组使用托槽及钢丝固定,且于骨折线两端植入支抗种植体以增强固定作用。对照组采用牙弓夹板法以固定牙槽骨。从临床疗效、牙龈出血指数方面进行疗效比较。结果研究组矫治后矫治效果优良率为90.48%,对照组矫治后矫治效果优良率为66.67%,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);两组患者固定前其牙龈出血倾向均较低,比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);矫治固定后14 d两组患者牙龈出血指数比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);矫治固定1月后两组患者牙龈出血指数比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论口腔正畸固定矫治技术治疗牙槽突骨折时,固位良好,效果可靠,对牙周刺激小,值得临床应用推广。

Objective To explore the clinical curative effect of orthodontic fixed appliances and arch bar in treatment of fracture of alveolar process and provide reference for the treatment of it. Methods Convenient selection 84 cases of patients with fracture of alveolar process treated in our hospital from January 2015 to February 2016 were selected and randomly divided into two groups, the research group adopted the bracket and wire for fixation, and the control group adopted the arch bar for fixation, and the clinical curative effect and gingival bleeding index were compared between the two groups. Results The difference in the correction effect excellent and good rate between the research group and the control group was obvious with statistical significance(90.48% vs 66.67%)(P<0.01), and the gingival bleeding tend was lower before fixation, and the difference was not statistically significant(P>0.05),after 14 d correction, the difference in the gingival bleeding index between the two groups was obvious with statistical significance(P<0.01), and the difference in the gingival bleeding index between the two groups after 1-month correction was obvious with statistical significance(P<0.01). Conclusion The effect of orthodontic fixed appliances and arch bar in treatment of fracture of alveolar process is reliable with good fixation and small periodontal stimulation, which is worth clinical application and promotion.