中国医药导刊
中國醫藥導刊
중국의약도간
CHINESE JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GUIDE
2013年
8期
1372-1373
,共2页
牙颈部牙本质敏感症%Gluma脱敏剂%极固宁%氟化钠甘油
牙頸部牙本質敏感癥%Gluma脫敏劑%極固寧%氟化鈉甘油
아경부아본질민감증%Gluma탈민제%겁고저%불화납감유
Dental hypersensitiveness%Gluma desensitizer%Green Or TM%75％of sodium fluoride glycerin
目的：评价Gluma脱敏剂、极固宁、75%氟化钠甘油治疗牙颈部牙本质敏感症的临床疗效。方法：将60例631颗牙颈部牙本质过敏症患牙随机分为3组,Gluma脱敏剂组、极固宁脱敏组和氟化钠甘油脱敏组,分别进行脱敏治疗,连续治疗2个疗程,观察即刻、3个月疼痛的VAS值。结果：Gluma脱敏剂、极固宁脱敏组的即刻有效率分别为94.90%、84.54%,显著优于75%氟化钠甘油脱敏组(66.06%),(P<0.01或P<0.05),脱敏后3个月,3组间比较有显著性差异(P<0.01或P<0.05)。结论：3种脱敏剂治疗牙本质过敏症均有较好的即刻疗效,但Gluma脱敏剂的远期疗效较好,值得推广使用。
目的：評價Gluma脫敏劑、極固寧、75%氟化鈉甘油治療牙頸部牙本質敏感癥的臨床療效。方法：將60例631顆牙頸部牙本質過敏癥患牙隨機分為3組,Gluma脫敏劑組、極固寧脫敏組和氟化鈉甘油脫敏組,分彆進行脫敏治療,連續治療2箇療程,觀察即刻、3箇月疼痛的VAS值。結果：Gluma脫敏劑、極固寧脫敏組的即刻有效率分彆為94.90%、84.54%,顯著優于75%氟化鈉甘油脫敏組(66.06%),(P<0.01或P<0.05),脫敏後3箇月,3組間比較有顯著性差異(P<0.01或P<0.05)。結論：3種脫敏劑治療牙本質過敏癥均有較好的即刻療效,但Gluma脫敏劑的遠期療效較好,值得推廣使用。
목적：평개Gluma탈민제、겁고저、75%불화납감유치료아경부아본질민감증적림상료효。방법：장60례631과아경부아본질과민증환아수궤분위3조,Gluma탈민제조、겁고저탈민조화불화납감유탈민조,분별진행탈민치료,련속치료2개료정,관찰즉각、3개월동통적VAS치。결과：Gluma탈민제、겁고저탈민조적즉각유효솔분별위94.90%、84.54%,현저우우75%불화납감유탈민조(66.06%),(P<0.01혹P<0.05),탈민후3개월,3조간비교유현저성차이(P<0.01혹P<0.05)。결론：3충탈민제치료아본질과민증균유교호적즉각료효,단Gluma탈민제적원기료효교호,치득추엄사용。
Objective: To observe the clinical effect of three different kinds of desensitizer in treatment of cervical dental hypersensitiveness, including Gluma desensitizer, Green or TM and 75% of sodium fluoride glycerin. Methods: The 631 teeth of 60cases with cervical dentine hypersensitivity were randomly divided into three groups, which were respectively treated with Gluma desensitizer, Green or TM and 75%of sodium fluoride glycerin for two course of treatment, and the therapeutic effect of three groups after treatment and at the time of 3 months VAS after treatment were analyzed Results:The instant effects of Gluma desensitizer(94.90%) and Green or TM(84.54%) were better than that of 75%of sodium fluoride glycerin (66.06%) (P<0.01or P<0.05).The therapeutic effect of Gluma desensitizer showed to be significant difference with Green or TM and 75%of sodium fluoride glycerin after treatment for 3 months(P<0.01or P<0.05). Conclusion:The therapeutic effect of the three desensitizers revealed to be favorable, but the prostecdtive efficacy of Gluma desensitizer shows to be better than the other desensitizers to be worthy of spread.
