SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1

COMPARİNG THE EFFECTİVENESS OF THREE DİFFERENT RETRACTİON METHODS ON PATİENT’S COMFORT: A PILOT STUDY

3 FARKLI DİŞETİ RETRAKSİYON YÖNTEMİNİN HASTA KONFORU AÇISINDAN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI: PİLOT ÇALIŞMA

Orhun EKREN
Nihan ÇERÇİ
Pages
48–56
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: The displacement quality, working time, sensitivity, bleeding after application and patient’s comfort were statistically significant among the groups (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this in vivo study was to evaluate patient’s comfort, displacement quality, bleeding, gingival recession and sensitivity of 3 different gingival displacement methods using Visual Anologue Scale(VAS).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and methods: A total of 110 subjects with healty gingiva who needed fixed partial dentures were included in the study and divided into 3 groups randomly.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: The displacement quality, working time, sensitivity, bleeding after application and patient’s comfort were statistically significant among the groups (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this in vivo study was to evaluate patient’s comfort, displacement quality, bleeding, gingival recession and sensitivity of 3 different gingival displacement methods using Visual Anologue Scale(VAS). Material and methods: A total of 110 subjects with healty gingiva who needed fixed partial dentures were included in the study and divided into 3 groups randomly. After subgingival preparation with a chamfer finish line, group 1 received conventional retraction cord only, group 2 received cord with AlCl3 and group 3 received retraction paste prior to final impression. Immediatelly after provisinalisation, 7 questions were assessed at baseline and 7 questions were assessed at 1, 7, 28 days. The effectiveness of retraction methods were assesed by the same clinician according to VAS and the number of teeth with gingival bleeding after retraction were recorded. Data were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whittney U, Ki Square test and the Bonferroni correction test (α=0,05). Results: The displacement quality, working time, sensitivity, bleeding after application and patient’s comfort were statistically significant among the groups (p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; 3 farklı retraksiyon yönteminin hasta konforu, dişeti yer değiştirme etkinlikleri, kanama, hassasiyet ve dişeti çekilmesi yönünden Vizüel Analog Skalası (VAS) kullanılarak karşılaştırılmasıdır. Materyal ve Metod: Sabit protez ihtiyacı olan, sağlıklı dişeti kriterlerine sahip toplam 110 birey çalışmaya dâhil edilmiş ve gruplara rastgele dağıtılmıştır. İlk gruptaki hastalara geleneksel retraksiyon kordu ile mekanik retraksiyon yöntemi, 2. grupta kord ve alüminyum klorid (AlCl) solüsyonu kombinasyonu ve 3. Grupta ise retraksiyon pastası ile dişeti retraksiyonu uygulanmıştır. İlk seansta dişler subgingival oluk (chamfer) bitiş çizgisi uygulanarak prepare edilmiş ve aynı seansta geçici restorasyonları yapılmıştır. Ölçü seansı için 7 gün sonraya randevu verilmiştir. Hasta konforu retraksiyon seansında 7 soru, retraksiyon sonrasında ise 1, 7 ve 28. günlerde 7 soru sorularak ve alınan cevaplar ile değerlendirilmiştir. Dişeti yer değiştirme etkinliği diş hekimi tarafından VAS kullanılarak değerlendirilmiş, retraksiyon sonrası kanama görülen diş sayıları kaydedilmiştir. Sonuçların istatistiksel analizinde Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whittney U, Ki kare testleri ve Bonferroni doğrulama testi kulllanıldı (? = 0,05). Bulgular: Karşılaştırılan yöntemler arasında dişeti yer değiştirme etkinliği, çalışma süresi, hassasiyet, işlem sonrası kanama ve hasta konforu açısından gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmuştur (p

🔖

Cite This Article

EKREN, O., ÇERÇİ, N. (2022). COMPARİNG THE EFFECTİVENESS OF THREE DİFFERENT RETRACTİON METHODS ON PATİENT’S COMFORT: A PILOT STUDY. Atatürk Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1, 48–56. https://ajindex.com/articles/452055

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Shillingburg HT. Fundamental of Fixed Prosthodontics. 3 ed Quintessence Publishing Co. London, 1997: 257-77
  2. Azzi R, Tsao TF, Carranza FA Jr, Kenney EB. Comparative study of gingival retraction methods. J Prosthet Dent 1983; 50: 561-5
  3. DonovanTE, Gandara BK, Nemetz H. Review and survey of medicaments used with gingival retraction cords. J Prosthet Dent 1985; 53: 525-31
  4. Laufer BZ, Baharav H, Cardash HS. The linear accuracy of impressions and stone dies as affected by the thickness of the impression magrin. Int J Prosthodont 1994; 7: 247-52
  5. Hansen PA, Tira DE, Barlo J. Current methods of finish-line exposure by practising prosthodontists. J Prosthodont 1999; 8: 163-170
  6. Bennani V, Schwass D, Chandler N. Gingival retraction techniques for implants versus teeth: Current status. J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139: 1354- 63
  7. Lesage P. Expasyl: protocol for use with fixed prosthodontics. Dental News 2004; 11: 33-7
  8. Ekren O, Kurtoğlu C. Dişeti Retraksiyon Yöntemleri. Atatürk Ünv. Diş Hek. Fak. Derg. 2008; 2: 78-84
  9. Al Hamad KQ, Azar WZ, Alwaeli HA, Said KN. A clinical study on the effects of cordless and conventional retraction techniques on the gingival and periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 1053-8
  10. Yang JC, Tsai CM, Chen MS, Wei JY, Lee SY, Lin CT. Clinical study of a newly developed injectiontype gingival retraction material. Chin Dent J 2005; 24,3: 147-51
  11. Donovan TE, Chee W.L.Current concepts in gingival displacement. Dent Clin N Am 2004; 48: 433-4 12. Nemetz H, Donovan T, Landesman H. Exposing the gingival margin: a systematic approach for the control of hemorrhage. J Prosthet Dent 1984; 51: 647-51
  12. Weir DJ, Williams BH. Clinical effectiveness of mechanical-chemical tissue displacement methods. J Prosthet Dent 1984; 51: 326-9
  13. Waldman SD. Girişimsel Ağrı Tedavisi. Lüleli N (Çev), 2. basım. Philedelphia: Elsevier Science; 2001
  14. Beier US, Kranewitter R, Dumfahrt H. Quality of impressions after use of the Magic Foam Cord gingival retraction systemda clinical study of 269 abutment teeth. Int J Prosthodont 2009; 22: 143-7 16. Wöstmann B, Rehmann P, Balkenhol M. Influence of different retraction techniques on crevicular fluid flow. Int J Prosthodont. 2008; 21: 215-6
  15. Runyan DA, Reddy TG, Shimoda ML. Fluid absorbency of retraction cords after soaking in aluminum chloride solution. J Prosthet Dent 1988; 60: 676-8
  16. Cloyd S, Puri S.Using the double-cord packing technique of tissue retraction for making crown