Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Ricketts' ºÐ¼®¹ý¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ °ñ°Ý¼º ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕ°ú ¥°±Þ Á¤»ó±³ÇÕÀÇ µÎºÎ ¹æ»ç¼± °èÃøÇÐÀû ºñ±³¿¬±¸

A CEPHALOMETRIC COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SKELETAL CLASS ¥² MALOCCLUSION AND CLASS I NORMAL OCCLUSION BY RICKETTS' ANALYSIS

´ëÇѱ¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°úÇÐȸÁö 1999³â 25±Ç 3È£ p.199 ~ 206
±èµ¿Çö, Áøº´·Î, ¼ÛÀçö,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±èµ¿Çö (  ) - ¿µ³²´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ºÎ¼Óº´¿ø
Áøº´·Î (  ) - ¿µ³²´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ºÎ¼Óº´¿ø
¼ÛÀçö (  ) - ¿µ³²´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ºÎ¼Óº´¿ø

Abstract

°á·Ð
º» ÀúÀÚµéÀº ¾Ç±³Á¤¼ö¼úÀÇ °¡´É¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀº ½ÉÇÑ ¼ºÀÎ ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚ¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î µÎ °³¾È
¸é°ñ°Ý¿¡¼­ ºÎÁ¶È­ÀÇ ¼ÒÀ縦 ÆľÇÇϱâ À§ÇØ, »óÇϾǰñ, »óÇϾÇÄ¡¾Æ°ü°è, ¿¬Á¶Á÷Ãø¸ðÀÇ °ü°è
¸¦ ÀûÀýÈ÷ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¸ç ¼ºÀåÀ» ¿¹ÃøÇϴ û»çÁøÀ̶ó ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â Visual Treatment Objective¸¦
Á¦½ÃÇÑ RickettsÀÇ ºÐ¼®¹ýÀ¸·Î ¥°±Þ Á¤»ó ±³ÇÕÀÚ¿Í °ñ°Ý¼º ¼ºÀÎ ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚ¸¦ ºñ±³ºÐ
¼®ÇÏ¿©, ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú´Ù.
1. Ä¡¿­ÀÇ ¹®Á¦¿¡¼­ ±¸Ä¡¿Í ÀüÄ¡ÀÇ °ü°è°¡ ÀüÇüÀûÀÎ ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ Æ¯¼º¿¡ º¸ÀÌ µíÀÌ
Àü¹æÀ¸·Î ½ÉÇÏ°Ô µ¹ÃâµÇ¾ú´Ù.
2. ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ AÁ¡ÀÇ À§Ä¡´Â Ư¡ÀûÀ¸·Î ÈĹæÀ§Ä¡µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, ÇϾȸ鰢Àº À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷
ÀÌ°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù.
3. ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ »óÇÏ¾Ç ÀüÄ¡ÀÇ À§Ä¡´Â ½ÉÇÏ°Ô Àü¹æÀ§Ä¡µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, »ó¾ÇÀüÄ¡ÀÇ °¢µµ´Â
A-Pog¿¡ ´ëÇØ ¼³ÃøÀ§Ä¡µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, ÇϾÇÀº À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù.
4. Ricketts' ºÐ¼®¿¡¼­ÀÇ esthetic lineÀº À¯ÀǼºÀÌ ¾ø¾ú´Ù.
5. ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ ¾È¸éÀÇ ±íÀÌ¿Í ÃàÀº Á¤»ó¿¡ ºñÇØ Å©°Ô µå·¯³ª, Àü¹æ¼ºÀå¹æÇâÀ» °­ÇÏ
°Ô ³ªÅ¸³»¾úÀ¸¸ç, facial taper´Â Á¤»ó¿¡ ºñÇØ ÀÛ°Ô ³ªÅ¸³ª ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ Ãø¸ð°¡ ¿À¸ñÇÑ
¾ç»óÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù.
6. ¥²±Þ ºÎÁ¤±³ÇÕÀÚÀÇ µÎ°³ÆíÀ§´Â ³²ÀÚ¿¡¼­¸¸ Å©°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, ÇϾÇÁöÀÇ À§Ä¡´Â ³²³à¸ðµÎ
¿¡¼­ Á¤»ó¿¡ ºñÇØ Àü¹æÀ§Ä¡µÇ¾ú°í ÇϾÇü ±æÀÌ ¶ÇÇÑ ³²³à ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼­ Á¤»óº¸´Ù Å« °ÍÀ» ¾Ë ¼ö
ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the parts of discrepancy on orthognathic
surgical cases with skeletal Class ¥² malocclusion. For this study, Ricketts' analysis
that has suggested visual treatment objective, as named for growth predictable blue
print, was used.
The results of this study were as follows :
1. In the denture problem, mandibular incisor and molar was positioned more
anteriorly in Class ¥² malocclusion.
2. The location of A point was characteristically posteriorly positioned in the Class ¥²
group, and mandible plane angle was within normal range in the groups.
3. Position of upper and lower anterior teeth to A-Pogonion line was anteriorly
positioned, and angulation of upper anterior tooth was lingually positioned in the Class
¥² group, but angulation of lower anterior tooth was not significant in the both groups.
4. Esthetic line of Ricketts' analysis was not significant statistically.
5. Facial depth and axis was larger, but facial taper (facial plane mandible plane) was
smaller in the Class ¥² group. So protruded and concave profile was seen in the Class
¥² group.
6. Cranial deflection was larger in the Class ¥² male group, ramus location was
anteriorly positioned and mandibular length was enlarged in the male and female of
Class ¥² group.

Å°¿öµå

Ricketts' analysis; Class ¥² amlocclusion; Craniofacial structure;

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed