CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较两种氟保护漆预防正畸治疗釉质脱矿的临床效果。方法：选取临床正畸患者20例440颗需要粘接正畸装置的牙齿，采用自身对照的方法，实验组220颗牙，用氟保护漆ClinproTM XT Varnish（3M ESPE）处理牙面，对照组220颗牙，用氟保护漆Fluor Protector（Vivadent）处理牙面。观察两组牙齿托槽脱落率及釉质脱矿指数（enamel decalcification index，EDI）。结果：实验组和对照组的托槽脱落率经统计学分析，差异无统计学意义（x2＝0．259，P ＝0．611）；两组釉质脱矿指数比较，差异无统计学意义（t＝0．362，P＝0．718）。结论：氟保护漆ClinproTM XT Varnish和Fluor Protector用于预防正畸治疗中釉质脱矿具有较好的临床效果。
목적：비교량충불보호칠예방정기치료유질탈광적림상효과。방법：선취림상정기환자20례440과수요점접정기장치적아치，채용자신대조적방법，실험조220과아，용불보호칠ClinproTM XT Varnish（3M ESPE）처리아면，대조조220과아，용불보호칠Fluor Protector（Vivadent）처리아면。관찰량조아치탁조탈락솔급유질탈광지수（enamel decalcification index，EDI）。결과：실험조화대조조적탁조탈락솔경통계학분석，차이무통계학의의（x2＝0．259，P ＝0．611）；량조유질탈광지수비교，차이무통계학의의（t＝0．362，P＝0．718）。결론：불보호칠ClinproTM XT Varnish화Fluor Protector용우예방정기치료중유질탈광구유교호적림상효과。
Objective:To determine whether two different fluor protectors could prevent enamel demineralization during orthodontic treatment and compare the effect difference between them. Method:A total of 20 patients(440 teeth) with fixed orthodontics were included in this study. By self-control, 220 teeth used 3M ESPE ClinproTM XT Varnish as experimental group,the other 220 teeth used Fluor Protector (Vivadent) as control group. Then the losing ratio of the brackets and the prevention of enamel demineralization were observed and compared in these two groups. Result:There was no significant dif-ference in the losing ratio of the brackets and enamel decalcification index between the experimental and control groups. Conclusion:These two different fluor protectors have a strong effect on reducing enamel demineralization during fixed or-thodontic treatment and can be applied clinically.