摘要
目的比较4种牙科手机的干燥方法 ,对临床选择合适的干燥方法提供借鉴。方法按干燥方法不同分为4组:真空干燥组、压缩空气吹干组、热力干燥组、清洗消毒机干燥组。选择同一品牌的低速直机、低速弯机、高速涡轮快插式手机及高速涡轮四孔手机各50支,经机械清洗消毒后,电子天平测量并记录干燥处置前后手机重量的变化,计算各组平均水分去除效率,使用SPSS软件行方差分析比较4组处置方法干燥效果的差异。结果 4种干燥方法对4种手机的水分去除效率之间的差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。真空干燥的水分去除效率最高,其对4类手机的平均水分去除效率分别为:低速直机69.93%,低速弯机93.21%,高速涡轮快插式手机92.70%,高速涡轮四孔手机94.27%。结论真空干燥法处置手机的干燥效果明显优于另3种干燥法。
Objective To compare drying methods for dental handpiece,and to provide references and guidance for choosing appropriate handpiece drying methods. Methods Four groups were established according to different methods of drying：vacuum drying,compressed air dryer drying,entire automatic hot cleaner drying,and sterilizing machine drying. Four types （with 50 in each type）of handpieces with the same brand were selected：low-speed straight （EX-6C）,low-speed bender （NAC-EC）,high speed turbine fast handset,and high speed turbine four hole handset. After cleaning and disinfection,each handpiece was subjected to the aforementioned four drying methods, and the mass was recorded before and after drying. SPSS software was used to calculate and compare the drying rate among these drying methods by analysis of variance. Results There were significant differences in the drying rate among four drying methods（P〈0.01）. The drying efficiency with vacuum drying was higher than the other three methods. The mean drying efficiency for four types of dentistry handset with vacuum drying method were as follows：low-speed straight（EX-6C）69.93%,low-speed bender（NAC-EC）93.21%,high speed turbine fast handset 92.70%, and high speed turbine four hole handset 94.27%. Conclusion The drying efficiency of vacuum drying method for handset is superior to the other three drying methods.
出处
《中华护理杂志》
CSCD
北大核心
2018年第3期318-320,共3页
Chinese Journal of Nursing
基金
南京医科大学科技发展基金面上项目(2015NJMU035)
关键词
牙科手机
管腔类器械
干燥法
真空
Dental Handpiece
Lumen Apparatus
Desiccation
Vacuum
