A comparison of the effect of different occlusal forms in mandibular implant overdentures.
A comparison of the effect of different occlusal forms in mandibular implant overdentures.
复制标题
下颌种植覆盖义齿不同咬合形式的效果比较。
DOI：
10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70156-8
复制
发表时间：
1998
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Rudy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mohamed Moataz Khamis;H. S. Zaki;T. Rudy
问题陈述种植覆盖义齿的后牙形态选择是根据个人喜好和经验，使用传统全口义齿修复的概念。目的：本研究(1)比较下颌种植覆盖义齿3种咬合形式（0度咬合、30度咬合、舌接触咬合）的咀嚼效率，(2)确定其对种植体支撑组织的影响。材料与方法选择8例下颌联合区4根状种植体与Hader棒连接的患者。为每位患者制作具有可互换后段的上颌和下颌义齿，并对三种咬合形式进行测试。通过客观的食物测试和主观的患者偏好问卷来评估每个后牙形态的咀嚼效率。定期评估种植体支持组织也进行。结果信度分析显示，各试验的r1系数均≥0.80(<0.001)，表明各试验的受试者一致性较高。方差分析表明，三种咬合形式的咀嚼效率有显著差异（p < 0.001）。与30度咬合或舌化咬合相比，0度咬合与咀嚼笔划的数量显著增加。不同的咬合形式没有发现临床上对种植体周围软硬组织有不利的影响。结论咀嚼效率试验和患者偏好评分显示，牙舌接触30度牙比0度牙具有更好的咀嚼效率。所有测试的咬合形式均未显示任何临床或放射学对种植体支持组织的有害影响。（中华假肢杂志1998；79:422-9）
Statement of problemPosterior tooth form selection for implant overdentures is made according to personal preference and experience using the concepts of conventional complete denture prosthodontics.PurposeThis study (1) compared the masticatory efficiency of three occlusal forms, 0 degrees, 30 degrees, and lingual contact (lingualized occlusion), in subjects with mandibular implant overdentures, and (2) determined their effects on the implant supporting tissues.Material and methodsEight patients who had four root form implants in the mandibular symphysis area connected with a Hader bar were selected. Maxillary and mandibular dentures were constructed for each patient with interchangeable posterior segments and the three occlusal forms were tested. The masticatory efficiency for each posterior tooth form was assessed with objective food tests and a subjective patient preference questionnaire. Periodic evaluation of implant-supporting tissues also was performed.ResultsReliability analysis showed that all R1coefficients were ≥0.80 (<0.001), indicating high subject consistency between multiple chewing efficiency trials. MANOVA analysis indicated a significant difference in chewing efficiency among the three occlusal forms ( p < 0.001). The 0 degree occlusal form was associated with a significantly higher number of chewing strokes compared with 30 degrees or lingualized occlusal forms. The different occlusal forms were not found to have a clinically detrimental effect on the peri-implant soft or hard tissues.ConclusionChewing efficiency tests and patient preference ratings showed that 30 degree teeth and lingual contact provided better chewing efficiency than 0 degree teeth. None of the tested occlusal forms showed any clinical or radiographic detrimental effect on the implant-supporting tissues. (J Prosthet Dent 1998;79:422-9.)