Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

À¯±¸Ä¡ÀÇ Ä¡¾Æ»èÁ¦¹æ¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ Nickel Chrome CrownÀÇ À¯Áö·Â¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

THE EFFECT OF TOOTH PREPARATION AND CEMENTATION ON THE RETENTION OF NICKEL CHROME CROWN

´ëÇѼҾÆÄ¡°úÇÐȸÁö 1987³â 14±Ç 1È£ p.65 ~ 75
À̼±±¸, ¼ÕÈ«±Ô,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̼±±¸ (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇÐ ¼Ò¾Æ¿Ü°ú
¼ÕÈ«±Ô (  ) - ¿¬¼¼´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ

Abstract

°á ·Ð
ÇÏ¾Ç ÁÂÃø Á¦ 2À¯±¸Ä¡¿¡ À־ 5°¡Áö ¼­·Î ´Ù¸¥ »èÁ¦¹æ¹ý°ú cement»ç¿ë À¯¹«¿¡ µû¸¥ ni
ckel chrome crownÀÇ À¯Áö·ÂÀ» TensilonÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °á°ú ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº °á·ÐÀ» ¾ò¾ú
´Ù.
1. cementationÇÑ ±ºÀÌ cementationÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº ±º¿¡ ºñÇØ ±× À¯Áö·ÂÀÌ ³ô¾ÒÀ¸¸ç Åë°èÇÐÀû
À¯ÀÇ Â÷°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.
2. cementationÇÑ ±º¿¡¼­´Â Ä¡Àº ¿¬ÇÏ un-dercut¸¦ ÀüÇô »èÁ¦ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº I±º¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³ô
Àº À¯Áö·ÂÀ» º¸¿´°í, Ä¡Àº ¿¬ÇÏ undercut¸¦ ¸ðµÎ »èÁ¦ÇÑ ¥³±º¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³·Àº À¯Áö·ÂÀ» º¸¿´
À¸¸ç µÎ ±º°£¿¡ Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.
3. cementationÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº ±º¿¡¼­´Â Ä¡Àº ¿¬ÇÏ undercut¸¦ »èÁ¦ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀº I±º¿¡¼­ °¡Àå ³ô
Àº À¯Áö·ÂÀ» º¸¿´°í Ä¡Àº ¿¬ÇÏ undercut¸¦ ¸ðµÎ »èÁ¦ÇÑ ¥³±º¿¡¼­ ±× °ªÀÌ 0·Î °¡Àå ³·°Ô ³ª
Ÿ³µÀ¸¸ç Åë°èÇÐÀû À¯ÀÇÂ÷°¡ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.
4. Nickel Chrome CrownÀÇ À¯Áö·ÂÀº, crown margin°ú Ä¡Àº ¿¬ÇÏ undercut ºÎÀ§¿ÍÀÇ Àû
ÇÕ¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ±â°èÀû À¯Áö·Â¿¡µµ ÀÇÁ¸Çϳª, cementÀÇ Á¢Âø·Â¿¡ ´õ ¸¹ÀÌ ÀÇÁ¸ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù.
#ÃÊ·Ï#
The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of various tooth-preparation
designs and cementation on the retention of the nickel chrome crown. Designs of the
preparation were di video into five groups by the amount of the subgingival undercut on
the bucko-lingual surface and proximal surfaces of the tooth. Total 100 Nickel Chrome
Crowns were uniformly trimmed and crimped for testing. Half of the samples were
uncemented, when tested, the remaining half were cemented with polycarboxylate cement
when tested. The force required to separate the crowns from the dies was recorded for
each crown.
The results were as follows:
1. The retentive forces of cemented group were greater than those of uncemented
group significant difference was demonstrated.
2. Among the cemented group, preparation I showed the most retentive value and
preparation ¥³ had the least retentive value, and a significant difference between the
former and the latter was found.
3. At noncemented group, preparation I showed the most retentive value and
preparation ¥³ had a zero retentive value, and a significant difference was also found
between them.
4. Mechanical retention achieved through crimping and adapting the crown margin to
the tooth surface slightly contributed to the separation-resistance of the Nickel Chrome
Crown, and revealed that the retention of the Nickel Chrome Crown primarily relied
upon the adhesiveness of the cements.

Å°¿öµå

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI