放大镜与显微镜辅助下瓷贴面牙体预备效果的比较

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.01.018

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: To assess and compare the effects of loupes and microscope on laminate veneer preparation of the first practitioner from the aspects of efficiency, quality and accuracy of preparation, and preference. Methods: Twenty young prosthodontists from the Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology were recruited into this study, which was prospective, single blind, self-control trials. The participants had no experience of using dental magnification devices. They prepared laminate veneers in the artificial dental model, under routine visual field (control group), 2.5× headwear loupes (loupes group), and 8× operating microscope (microscopic group) by turning. The time for tooth preparation was recorded. Thereafter, subjective assessments of efficiency, quality of preparation and preference were performed by themselves using visual analogue score (VAS). Expert assessments of quality and accuracy of preparation were performed by two professors using stereomicroscope and digital technique respectively. Results: In terms of efficiency, the subjective scores for the control group, loupes group and microscopic group were 7.15±1.73, 8.10±0.91 and 5.40±2.04, respectively. There was significant difference between the loupes group and microscopic group (P<0.05). The time of tooth preparation for the control group, loupes group and microscopic group was (430.10±163.04) s, (393.90±157.27) s and (441.95±164.18) s, respectively. There was significant diffe-rence between the loupes group and microscopic group (P<0.05). The loupes group was more efficient than the microscopic group. In terms of the quality of preparations, the subjective scores for the control group, loupes group and microscopic group were 6.55±2.09, 7.85±0.99 and 6.25±1.77, respectively. There was significant difference between the loupes group and microscopic group (P<0.05). The expert evaluations for the control group, loupes group and microscopic group were 12.20±1.67, 12.50±1.70 and 11.35±2.60, respectively. There was significant difference between the loupes group and microscopic group (P<0.05). The loupes group had higher quality than the microscopic group. In terms of the accuracy of preparations, the control group, loupes group and microscopic group of incisal 1/3 were (0.107±0.097) mm, (0.142±0.118) mm and (0.123±0.087) mm, respectively, of middle 1/3 were (0.128±0.073) mm, (0.113±0.105) mm and (0.125±0.077) mm, respectively, and of cervical 1/3 were (0.075±0.054) mm, (0.068±0.044) mm and (0.058±0.047) mm, respectively. There was no significant difference among the three groups (P>0.05). In terms of the preference, the subjective scores for the control group, loupes group and microscopic group were 6.55±2.31, 8.60±1.10 and 5.80±2.07, respectively. There was significant difference between the loupes group and microscopic group (P<0.05). The participants had the highest preference for loupes. Conclusion: For the first practitioners, loupes is better than microscope for laminate veneer preparation.

Key words: Dental equipment, Dental instruments, Tooth preparation, Loupes, Microscopy

CLC Number:

R783.2

Yan-jun GE,Xiao-qiang LIU. Effects of loupes and microscope on laminate veneer preparation[J].Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019, 51(1): 100-104.

Figures/Tables 3

Table 1

Figure 1

Table 2

References 16

[1]	Carr GB, Murgel CA . The use of the operating microscope in endodontics[J]. Dent Clin North Am, 2010,54(2):191-214. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2010.01.002 pmid: 20433974
[2]	Eichenberger M, Perrin P, Ramseyer ST , et al. Visual acuity and experience with magnification devices in Swiss dental practices[J]. Oper Dent, 2015,40(4):E142-E149. doi: 10.2341/14-103-C pmid: 25748209
[3]	Perrin P, Eichenberger M, Neuhaus KW , et al. A visual acuity and magnification devices in dentistry[J]. Swiss Dent J, 2016,126(3):222-235. pmid: 27023468
[4]	Sitbon Y, Attathom T . Minimal intervention dentistry II: Part 6. Microscope and microsurgical techniques in periodontics[J]. British Dent J, 2014,216(9):503-509. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.356 pmid: 24809564
[5]	Sitbon Y, Attathom T, St-Georges AJ . Minimal intervention dentistry II: part 1. Contribution of the operating microscope to dentistry[J]. British Dent J, 2014,216(3):125-130. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.48 pmid: 24504295
[6]	Mamoun J . Use of high-magnification loupes or surgical operating microscope when performing dental extractions[J]. N Y State Dent J, 2013,79(3):28-33. pmid: 23767397
[7]	Malterud MI . Magnification: You can’t effectively practice minimally in biomimetic dentistry without it[J]. Gen Dent, 2013,61(3):14-17. pmid: 23649567
[8]	Brito MJ, Moreira GJ, Normanha JA , et al. Midbuccal canals of maxillary molars evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography: Endodontic management of two cases[J]. Braz Dent J, 2013,24(6):575-579. doi: 10.1590/0103-6440201302358 pmid: 24474352
[9]	Albuquerque DV, Kottoor J, Dham S , et al. Endodontic management of maxillary permanent first molar with 6 root canals: 3 case reports[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2010,110(4):e79-e83. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2010.04.017 pmid: 20656533
[10]	Lussi A, Kronenberg O, Megert B . The effect of magnification on the iatrogenic damage to adjacent tooth surfaces during class II preparation[J]. J Dent, 2003,31(4):291-296. doi: 10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00029-0 pmid: 12735924
[11]	Neuhaus KW, Jost F, Perrin P , et al. Impact of different magnification levels on visual caries detection with ICDAS[J]. J Dent, 2015,43(12):1559-1564. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.09.002
[12]	Mitropoulos P, Rahiotis C, Kakaboura A , et al. The impact of magnification on occlusal caries diagnosis with implementation of the ICDAS II criteria[J]. Caries Res, 2012,46(1):82-86. doi: 10.1159/000335988 pmid: 22327413
[13]	Smadi L, Khraisat A . Detection of a second mesiobuccal canal in the mesiobuccal roots of maxillary first molar teeth[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod, 2007,103(3):e77-e81. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.10.007 pmid: 17223589
[14]	Donaldson ME, Knight GW, Guenzel PJ . The effect of magnification on student performance in pediatric operative dentistry[J]. J Dent Educ, 1998,62(11):905-910. pmid: 9893687
[15]	Gurel G, Sesma N, Calamita MA , et al. Influence of enamel pre-servation on failure rates of porcelain laminate veneers[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2013,33(1):31-39. doi: 10.11607/prd.1488 pmid: 23342345
[16]	Ferrari M, Patroni S, Balleri P . Measurement of enamel thickness in relation to reduction for etched laminate veneers[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 1992,12(5):407-413. pmid: 1343012

Related Articles 13

[1]	Qian DING,Wen-jin LI,Feng-bo SUN,Jing-hua GU,Yuan-hua LIN,Lei ZHANG. Effects of surface treatment on the phase and fracture strength of yttria- and magnesia-stabilized zirconia implants [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(4): 721-728.
[2]	Si-yu WU,Ya-ning LI,Xiao ZHANG,Long-wei LV,Yun-song LIU,Hong-qiang YE,Yong-sheng ZHOU. Prediction, analysis and application of learning curve of tooth preparation for all ceramic crowns of maxillary central incisors [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(1): 108-113.
[3]	HUANG Xin-rui,LI Sha,GAO Song. Progress in filters for denoising cryo-electron microscopy images [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(2): 425-433.
[4]	Xiao-qiang LIU,Yu LIAO,Yang YANG,Jian-feng ZHOU,Jian-guo TAN. Effects of loupes and microscope on the prosthodontist’s posture from ergonomic aspects [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2020, 52(5): 948-951.
[5]	YANG Yin-jie, HOU Ben-xiang, HOU Xiao-mei. Effect of autoclave on surface microstructure and cyclic fatigue resistance of R-phase rotary instruments#br# [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2018, 50(5): 882-886.
[6]	WANG Fang-fang, YANG Yin-jie, HOU Xiao-mei. Surface microstructure and cyclic fatigue resistance of electro discharged machining nickel-titanium endodontic instrument [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2018, 50(5): 876-881.
[7]	LI Yun-qian1,2,3, SHENG Hui, LIANG Lei, ZHAO Yue, LI Huai-ye, BAI Ning, WAN Tong, YUAN Lan, HAN Hong-bin. Application of anoptomagnetic probe Gd-DO3A-EA-FITC in imaging and analyzing the brain interstitial space [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2018, 50(2): 221-225.
[8]	LI Hao, LIU Yu-hua, LUO Zhi-qiang. Effects of bioactive glass on reducing the hypersensitivity after full crown preparation [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2017, 49(4): 709-713.
[9]	CHEN Na, WU Wei, DING Rui-ying, HAN Hao-lun, WANG Hong-nan, LI Bao-wei， WANG Gang. Morphological changes on cochlear hair cells of rats in simulated weightlessness and inboard noise [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2017, 49(3): 501-500.
[10]	ZHAO Yue, LI Yun-qian, LI Huai-ye, LI Yu-liang, LIU Lan-xiang, YUAN Lan, ZHANG Shu-jia, . Drainage characteristic of the brain interstitial fluid detected by using fluorescence and magnetic tracer method [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2017, 49(2): 303-309.
[11]	WU Li-jie, WANG Ben,LIAO Qin-ping, ZHANG Rui. Confocal laser scanning electron microscopy for assessment of vaginal Lactobacillus crispatus biofilm [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2015, 47(6): 933-938.
[12]	LI Jing-Zi, WANG Su-Xia, QIN Xiao-Qi, XU Yuan, PANG Wei, E Jie, ZHENG Xin. Correlation between urinary sediment spectra and pathological patterns of renal biopsies [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2014, 46(6): 920-925.
[13]	ZHENG Chun-yan，PAN Jie ， WANG Zu-hua ， WANG Yang. Effects of hydrogen peroxide-containing bleaching on the growth of Streptococcus mutans biofilm on enamel disc surface [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2014, 46(1): 30-34.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

Parameter	Excellent (3 points)	Compromised (2 points)	Standard not met (1 point)
Facial reduction	Optimal reduction (incisal third: 0.7 mm, middle third: 0.5 mm, cervical third: 0.3 mm)	Moderately over-reduced or under-reduced	Severely over-reduced or under-reduced
Surface smoothness	Fine diamond texture	Catches with explorer tip	Horizontal or vertical steps
Cervical finish line configuration	Chamfer is continuous and well-defined	Chamfer is moderately nonconti-nuous or moderately lack of definition	Chamfer is noncontinuous or lack of definition or aggressively prepared
Cervical finish line position	Placed to specified target: 0.5-1.0 mm supragingivally	Even with gingival margin or <0.5 mm supragingivally	>1.0 mm supragingivally or subgingivally
Interproximal finish line	Mesial and distal finish lines are continuous and well-defined, extended to, but do not open the interproximal contact region	Mesial or distal finish line is mo-derately noncontinuous or mode-rately lack of definition, at interproximal surface but do not extend to contact region	Mesial and distal finish lines are noncontinuous or lack of definition or aggressively prepared, at labial surface or open the contact

Group	Efficiency of preparation		Quality of preparation		Accuracy of preparation/mm
Group	Subjective visual analogue score	Time/s	Subjective visual analogue score	Expert evaluation	Incisal third	Middle third	Cervical third	Subjective visual analogue score
Control	7.15±1.73^a	430.10±163.04^ab	6.55±2.09^ab	12.20±1.67^ab	0.107±0.097^a	0.128±0.073^a	0.075±0.054^a	6.55±2.31^a
Loupes	8.10±0.91^a	393.90±157.27^a	7.85±0.99^a	12.50±1.70^a	0.142±0.118^a	0.113±0.105^a	0.068±0.044^a	8.60±1.10^b
Microscopic	5.40±2.04^b	441.95±164.18^b	6.25±1.77^b	11.35±2.60^b	0.123±0.087^a	0.125±0.077^a	0.058±0.047^a	5.80±2.07^a
P	<0.001	0.017	0.018	0.015	0.299	0.637	0.467	<0.001

Effects of loupes and microscope on laminate veneer preparation

RICH HTML

PDF (PC)