RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      선택해제

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • KCI등재

        Periotome versus piezotome as an aid for atraumatic extraction: a randomized controlled trial

        Mohammed Abdullah Alraqibah,Jingade Krishnojirao Dayashankara Rao,Bader Massad Alharbi 대한구강악안면외과학회 2022 대한구강악안면외과학회지 Vol.48 No.6

        Objectives: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial was designed to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of the periotome and piezotome as aids for atraumatic extraction and its sequalae. Materials and Methods: The study sample comprised 48 teeth, equally allotted to the piezotome or periotome groups by random allocation, in par-ticipants aged 19-62 years. All samples in both groups had either complete tooth structure or intact roots without crowns and had mobility ≤grade II. Clinical parameters of operative duration, presence or absence of gingival laceration, reported operative and postoperative pain, and intake of analge-sics following extraction were recorded. IBM SPSS software package version 22 was used for data entry and analysis. Results: The mean operation time was significantly (P≤0.05) longer in the piezotome group than in the periotome group. However, fewer gingival lac-erations were observed with use of a piezotome than with a periotome, although no significant difference was observed. The piezotome group reported significantly (P≤0.05) higher visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores during the procedure and non-significantly higher scores thereafter until the third postoperative day. In the piezotome group, the dosage of analgesic was higher, although the periotome group had a higher percentage of participants who used analgesics postoperatively; however, these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The present clinical trial favors the use of periotome over piezotome for atraumatic extraction due to shorter operating time, lower post-operative VAS pain scores, and lower dosage of analgesics despite the superior ability of the piezotome to prevent gingival laceration.

      연관 검색어 추천

      이 검색어로 많이 본 자료

      활용도 높은 자료

      해외이동버튼