摘要
牙龈炎或牙周炎患者60例随机分3组:蒸馏水组(对照)、0.2％洗必太组和口洁素组。治前菌斑指数分别为3.51±0.65,3.51±0.49和3.39±0.54,牙龈指数为1.39±0.36,1.33±0.28和1.27±0.24。含漱1周后复诊,菌斑指数为3.29±0.56,2.96±0.64和2.67±0.60,洗必太组与对照组差别不显著(P>0.05),口洁素组与对照组差别显著(P<0.05),说明口洁素抑制菌斑效果优于洗必太。牙龈指数为1.15±0.19,1.05±0.24和1.00±0.21,各组间差别无显著意义(P>0.05)。查毕将各组再分为两部分行龈上洁牙术,一部分用手持器械,另一部分用超声器械。术毕嘱患者继续使用原含漱剂1周后第2次复诊。结果不论菌斑指数或牙龈指数各组间均无差别(P>0.05);各组均较初诊和第1次复诊时明显降低(P<0.05或P<0.01);含漱剂种类与洁牙方法间不存在交互影响。洁牙平均时间手持器械组为45.20±13.55min,超声器械组为37.70±8.57min(P<0.05),后者较省时。
Sixty patients with gingivitis or periodontitis were divided randomly into control, 0.2% hibitane and mouth-deaning gargle groups. Before treatment the plague indexes (PI) were 3.51 ± 0.65, 3.51± 0.49 and 3.39 ± 0.54 while gingival indexes (GI) 1.39 ± 0.36, 1.33 ± 0.28 and 1.27 ± 0.24 respectively. After one week's rinsing PI were 3.29 ± 0.56, 2.96 ± 0.64 and 2.67 ± 0.60. As compared with the control group, the hibitane group showed no significant difference (P>0.05), while the mouth-cleaning gargle group had significant difference (P<0.05). This result indicated that mouth-deaning gargle is superior to hibitane in controlling plaque. GI were 1.15 ± 0.19, 1.05 ± 0.24 and 1.00 ± 0.21, no difference was found between groups (P>0.05). After that, the patients of each group were redivided into two parts for supragingival scaling treatment, one with hand scalers, the other, ultrasonic Then, the patients were asked to use original rinsing solutions for another week. No differences were found either in PI or GI between groups thereafter, but they were more significantly reduced than before (P<0.05 or P<0.01). No interaction was found between rinsing solutions and scaling methods. The mean time of scaling with hand sealers was 45.20± 13.55 mm, while ultrasonic, 37.70 ± 8.57 min (P<0.05). The latter saves time.
出处
《第四军医大学学报》
1991年第2期110-112,共3页
Journal of the Fourth Military Medical University
关键词
牙龈炎
牙周炎
口洁素
超声波治疗
gingivitis
periodontitis
drug evaluation
ultrasonic therapy
