Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼³Ãø ±³Á¤Ä¡·á¸¦ À§ÇÑ ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü Á¦ÀÛÀÇ Á¤¹Ðµµ

Construction of an ideal set-up model for lingual orthodontic treatment

Korean Journal of Orthodontics 2005³â 35±Ç 6È£ p.459 ~ 474
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
¹è±â¼± ¼Õ¿ì¼º

Abstract

Ä¡¾Æ ¸ðÇü ¹× ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü¿¡¼­ÀÇ Á¤È®ÇÑ ¼ø¼³Ãø ¹× ±Ù¿ø½É °æ»çÀÇ ÃøÁ¤À» À§ÇØ °³¹ßµÈ ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü ÃøÁ¤±â·Î 4°³ÀÇ Á¦1¼Ò±¸Ä¡ ¹ß°Å ÈÄ ¼³Ãø ±³Á¤Ä¡·á¸¦ ½ÃÇà ¹ÞÀº 22¸íÀÇ ¼ºÀΠȯÀÚµéÀÇ Ä¡·á ÀüÈÄÀÇ Áø´Ü ¸ðÇü ¹× ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇüÀ» °èÃøÇÏ¿© ¼³Ãø ±³Á¤Ä¡·á¿¡¼­ °£Á¢ Á¢Âø¼ú½ÄÀ» À§ÇØ »ç¿ëµÇ´Â ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇüÀÇ ÇüÅ°¡ Ä¡·á °á°ú¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâÀ» ¾Ë¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¿¬±¸ °á°ú Ä¡·á Àü Áø´Ü ¸ðÇü°ú ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü°£ÀÇ »óÇÏ¾Ç 6ÀüÄ¡ÀÇ ¼ø¼³Ãø ±Ù¿ø½É °æ»ç Â÷ÀÌ´Â °¢°¢ -3.93 ¡¾ 6.98¡Æ, 1.87 ¡¾ 5.79¡Æ ¿´À¸¸ç ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü°ú Ä¡·á ÈÄ Ä¡¾Æ ¸ðÇü°£ÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ´Â -4.31 ¡¾ 5.91¡Æ, -2.16 ¡¾ 3.27¡Æ¿´´Ù. Ä¡·á ÈÄ Ä¡¾Æ ¸ðÇü¿¡¼­´Â Ä¡·á Àü¿¡ ºñÇØ »óÇÏ¾Ç ÀüÄ¡ºÎÀÇ ¼ø¼³Ãø °æ»ç°¡ -8.24 ¡¾ 5.39¡Æ¸¸Å­ À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ°Ô º¯È­µÇ¾ú´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ facebow transfer µîÀ» ÅëÇØ ±³Çձ⿡ Ä¡¾Æ ¸ðÇüÀ» °Å»óÇÏÁö ¾Ê°íµµ ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü ÃøÁ¤±â¸¸À¸·Î Ä¡¾Æ ¸ðÇü°ú Ãø¸ð µÎºÎ¹æ»ç¼±±Ô°Ý»çÁøÀ» ¼­·Î ¿¬°èÇÏ¿© ºÐ¼®ÇÏ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀ» °í¾ÈÇÏ¿© ±× ÀÓ»óÀû¿ë °¡´É¼ºÀ» ¾Ë¾Æº¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇÏ¿© ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü ÃøÁ¤±â¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© Áø´Ü¿ë ¸ðÇüÀ¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °èÃø °ÔÀÌÁö °¢°ú Ãø¸ð µÎºÎ¹æ»ç¼±±Ô°Ý»çÁø»ó¿¡ µ¿ÀÏÇÑ °èÃøÁ¡°ú ¼±ºÐµéÀ» ÀÛµµÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ »ê¼ú °ÔÀÌÁö °¢À» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç ±× °á°ú »óÇÏ¾Ç ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼­ À¯ÀǼº ÀÖ´Â Â÷ÀÌ°¡ ³ªÅ¸³ªÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. µû¶ó¼­ ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü ÃøÁ¤±â¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© Ãø¸ð µÎºÎ¹æ»ç¼±»çÁø¿¡¼­ÀÇ °èÃøÄ¡µéÀ» Áø´Ü¿ë ¸ðÇü¿¡¼­ÀÇ °èÃøÄ¡¿Í ¼­·Î ¿¬°è½ÃÄÑ ºÐ¼®ÇÏ°í À̸¦ ¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü Á¦ÀÛ ½Ã ¹Ý¿µÇÏ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀÌ ÀÓ»óÀûÀ¸·Î »ç¿ë °¡´ÉÇÔÀ» ¾Ë ¼ö ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.

Making a precise and ideal set-up model is an essential part in the indirect bonding procedure for lingual orthodontic treatment. To evaluate the accuracy of the making a set-up model, 22 adult patients who received lingual orthodontic treatment with 4 bicuspid extractions were selected, and 3 sets of dental models (before, set-up, and after treatment) were measured using the set-up model gauge, an instrument for measuring the incllnation and acgulation of the clinical crowns on the dental model. Two sets of lateral cephalograms (before and after) from each patient were also evaluated. The mean difference between the before treatment model and the set-up model was -3.93 ¡¾ 6.98¡Æ for the inclination and 1.87 ¡¾ 5.79¡Æ for the angulation. And the mean difference between the set-up model and the after treatment model was -4.31 ¡¾ 5.91¡Æ labiolingually and -2.16 ¡¾ 3.27¡Æ mesiodistally. The after treatment model differed from the before treatment model about -8.24 ¡¾ 5.39¡Æ in inclination. There were no significant difference between the measured gauge that measured from the dental model using the set-up model gauge and the calculated gauge angle measured from the lateral cephalogram using constructed points and lines. Using the set-up model gauge, it is possible to evaluate the study model 3-dimensionally in relation with the patient¡¯s lateral cephalogram and establish whether the doctor¡¯s prescription or overcorrection is built in the set-up model precisely.

Å°¿öµå

¼³Ãø±³Á¤;¼Â¾÷ ¸ðÇü;Áø´Ü ¸ðÇü °èÃø;ÀýÄ¡ °¢µµ;Lingual orthodontics;Set-up model;Study model measurement;Incisal inclination

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

  

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

SCI(E)
KCI
KoreaMed