摘要
目的对氟保护漆涂布、非创伤性充填技术(ART)和传统窝沟封闭技术预防儿童第一恒磨牙龋病的临床效果进行比较,寻找适合在学校开展的龋病预防适宜技术。方法选取来自2个学校的7~8岁、四颗第一恒磨牙全部萌出、沟裂深、无龋坏的儿童600名(2 400颗牙),采用随机数字表法,将受试者分为三组:ART技术组(使用树脂改良型玻璃离子进行窝沟封闭)、氟保护漆组(全口涂布氟保护漆Duraphat,每6个月涂布1次)和传统窝沟封闭技术组(使用光固化树脂封闭剂进行窝沟封闭),每组200名(800颗牙)。在2个月内完成封闭和涂布工作,封闭和涂布后6个月、1年、2年、3年对窝沟封闭术封闭剂保留率及新增龋齿情况进行复查。统计学检验水准取α=0.05,采用R×C表χ~2检验的分割法时,检验水准校正为α'=0.0125。结果随访3年时,539名儿童接受龋病复查,有2 156颗牙被检查,失访244颗牙(10.17%)。ART技术组封闭后1、2、3年封闭剂保留率分别为91.9%、80.5%和73.6%;传统窝沟封闭技术组封闭后1、2、3年封闭剂保留率分别为91.0%、79.9%和76.1%;两种窝沟封闭方式封闭剂保留率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。三组新增龋齿发生率逐年增加(P均<0.01);3年时,ART技术组和传统窝沟封闭技术组新增龋齿发生率均分别低于氟保护漆组(P均<0.0125)。三组的龋均逐年呈不同程度增加;3年时,ART技术组和传统窝沟封闭技术组的龋均分别低于氟保护漆组(P均<0.01);而两个窝沟封闭技术组之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 ART技术和传统窝沟封闭技术同样对儿童第一恒磨牙有良好的防龋效果。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of fiuor protector coating, atraumatic restoration treatment （ART） technique and traditional pit and fissure sealing for preventing dental caries of children＇s first permanent molars to look for the caries prevention technology suitable for school development. Methods A total of 600 children aged 7 to 8 years old with four of the first permanent molars （ deep fissure but without caries） of all eruption （2 400 teeth ） were selected from 2 schools. The subjects were divided into three groups by random number table method （200 subjects, 800 teeth for each group） ：ART group （filling with modified glass ionomer for pit and fissure sealing ） , fluor protector group （full mouth coa- ting with fluoride protection paint-Duraphat, one time every 6 months） and traditional pit and fissure sealing group （sealing with light-cured resin for pit and fissure sealing）. The sealing procedure was completed within 2 months. The retention rates of fissure sealant and incoming dental caries at 6 months, 1 year,2 years and 3 years after sealing were re-checked. Statis- tics test level was α =0.05 ,and the test level was corrected as α＇ =0. 0125 when using R x C table partition method ofx2 test. Results In 539 children received reexamination of dental caries at follow up of 3 years,2 156 teeth were examined, and 244 teeth（ 10. 17% ）were lost to follow-up. At 1-,2- and 3-year after sealing, the retention rates of sealant were 91.9% ,80.5% and 73.6% in ART group and 91.0 % ,79.9 % and 76.1% in traditional pit and fissure sealing group, and there were no significant differences between two pit and fissure sealing methods （ all P 〉 0.05）. The incidences of in- coming dental caries increased year by year in 3 groups （all P 〈 0.01 ）. At 3-year follow-up, compared with fluor protector group, incidences of incoming dental caries decreased significantly in ART group and traditional pit and fissure sealing group （all P 〈 0.0125 ）. The mean decay-, missing-, filling- teeth （DMFT） values increased year by year in 3 groups. At 3- year follow-up, compared with fluor protector group, the mean DMFT values in ART group and traditional pit and fissure sealing group decreased significantly（ all P 〈 0.01 ） , while there was no significant difference between two pit and fissure sealing methods （ P 〉 0.05 ）. Conclusion Both ART technique and traditional pit and fissure sealing technique have good anticarious effects on children＇s first permanent molars.
出处
《中国临床研究》
CAS
2017年第4期455-458,462,共5页
Chinese Journal of Clinical Research
基金
湖南省卫生厅科研基金(B2010-064)
关键词
第一恒磨牙
非创伤性充填技术
氟保护漆
传统窝沟封闭技术
龋病预防
First permanent molar
Atraumatie restoration treatment
Fluor protector
Traditional pit and fissure sea-ling
Prevention of caries
