Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

ARCUSdigma 2¿Í Checkbite¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °ú·Î°æ»ç°¢ ºñ±³

Comparison of condylar guidance using ARCUSdigma 2 and Checkbite

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Ã¶ÇÐȸÁö 2013³â 51±Ç 3È£ p.153 ~ 159
À̵¿ÀÎ, ÀÌÀåÈñ, ¼Õ¹Ì°æ, Á¤ÀçÇå, °­µ¿¿Ï,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
À̵¿ÀΠ( Lee Dong-In ) - Á¶¼±´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
ÀÌÀåÈñ ( Lee Chang-Hee ) - Á¶¼±´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
¼Õ¹Ì°æ ( Son Mee-Kyung ) - Á¶¼±´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
Á¤ÀçÇå ( Chung Chae-Heon ) - Á¶¼±´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
°­µ¿¿Ï ( Kang Dong-Wan ) - Á¶¼±´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ º¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç

Abstract

¿¬±¸ ¸ñÀû:±Ù·¡¿¡ µé¾î üũ¹ÙÀÌÆ® ¹ý»Ó¸¸ ¾Æ´Ï¶ó µðÁöÅÐ ¼¾¼­¸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ÇϾÇÀÇ ¿îµ¿À» ±â·Ï, ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿© °ú·Î°¢À» °è»êÇÏ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀÌ °³¹ßµÇ¾î »ç¿ëµÇ¾îÁ® ¿À°í ÀÖÀ¸³ª µÎ ¹æ¹ý°£ÀÇ ºñ±³ÇÏ´Â ¿¬±¸´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ÀÌ¿¡ »õ·Î¿î ¹æ¹ýÀÎ ARCUSdigma 2 systemÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ¹æ¹ý°ú ÀüÅëÀûÀÎ ¹æ¹ýÀΠüũ¹ÙÀÌÆ® ¹ýÀ¸·Î °ú·Î°¢À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© µÎ ¹æ¹ý °£ÀÇ Â÷À̸¦ ºñ±³ÇØ º¸°íÀÚ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

¿¬±¸ ´ë»ó ¹× ¹æ¹ý:±³Á¤Ä¡·áÀÇ °æÇèÀÌ ¾ø°í, Á¦3´ë±¸Ä¡¸¦ Á¦¿ÜÇÑ Ä¡¾ÆÀÇ °á¼ÕÀÌ ¾ø°í, ±³ÇÕÆò¸éÀÇ º¯È­¸¦ ¼ö¹ÝÇÑ ±¤¹üÀ§ÇÑ ¼öº¹ÀÌ ¾øÀ¸¸ç, ¾Ç°üÀý ÁúȯÀÌ ¾ø´Â 24¼¼ºÎÅÍ 34¼¼ »çÀÌÀÇ °Ç°­ÇÑ ÀþÀº ¼ºÀÎ ³²³à(³² 10¸í, ¿© 10¸í)¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÏ¿© Camper's planeÀ» ±âÁØÀ¸·Î ÇÏ¿© ARCUSdigma 2 system°ú ¿Î½º¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÑ Ã¼Å©¹ÙÀÌÆ®¹ýÀ» °¢°¢ 3¹ø¾¿ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç ±³ÇÕ±â´Â KaVo Protar Evo 7 ¹ÝÁ¶Àý¼º ±³Çձ⸦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© °¢°¢ÀÇ ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î °ú·Î°æ»ç°¢À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÎ ¹æ¹ý °£ÀÇ ÀڷḦ SPSS 20À» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ Mann-Whitney U Test ¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: 1. ARCUSdigma 2 system¿¡¼­ Àü¹æ½Ã»ó°ú·Î°¢Àº ÁÂ¿ì °¢°¢ 26.97µµ(¡¾7.38µµ), 29.80µµ(¡¾8.19µµ)·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, Ãø¹æ°ú·Î°æ»ç°¢Àº 5.75µµ(¡¾3.47µµ)¿Í 8.10µµ(¡¾4.98µµ)·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾ú´Ù. 2. üũ¹ÙÀÌÆ®¹ý¿¡¼­ Àü¹æ½Ã»ó°ú·Î°¢Àº ÁÂ¿ì °¢°¢ 25.20µµ(¡¾6.53µµ), 28.18µµ(¡¾7.38µµ)·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, Ãø¹æ°ú·Î°æ»ç°¢Àº 10.97µµ(¡¾5.63µµ)¿Í 12.03µµ(¡¾5.22µµ)·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾ú´Ù.

°á·Ð: µÎ ¹æ¹ý ¸ðµÎ ³²³à°£ Á¿찣 À¯ÀÇÀû Â÷ÀÌ´Â ³ªÅ¸³ªÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÀ¸¸ç µÎ ¹æ¹ý »çÀÌ¿¡¼­´Â Ãø¹æ½Ã»ó°ú·Î°¢¿¡¼­ ARCUSdigma 2¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °ªÀÌ Checkbite¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °ªº¸´Ù Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ÀÛ°Ô ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾ú´Ù(P<.05).

PURPOSE: Nowadays, checkbite methods and a digital sensor are used to analyze the movement of mandible. However, there are no study comparing two methods. Therefore, this study has compared measuring the condylar inclination methods by using the new ARCUSdigma 2 system and the checkbite method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Young 20 adults without any orthodontic treatment experiences, missing teeth, and restorations with the change of occlusal plane were tested. Angles of condylar path were measured 3 times each, based on Camper's line, by using two methods. KaVo PROTAR Evo 7 semi-adjustable articulator was used and the data were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS: 1. The anterior sagittal condylar inclination by ARCUSdigma 2 system were measured as 26.97 degree (¡¾7.38 degree) on the left side and 29.80 degree(¡¾8.19 degree) on the right side. The lateral condylar inclination were measured as 5.75 degree(¡¾3.47 degree) on the left side and 8.10 degree (¡¾4.98 degree) on the right side. 2. The anterior sagittal condylar inclination by checkbite method were measured as 25.20 degree (¡¾6.53 degree) on the left side and 28.18 degree (¡¾7.38 degree) on the right side. The lateral condylar inclination were measured as 10.97 degree (¡¾5.63 degree) on the left side and 12.03 degree (¡¾5.22 degree) on the right side. There was no statistically significant difference between male and female (P>.05). 3. The lateral condylar inclinations of ARCUSdigma 2 were statistically significantly smaller than that of checkbite method (P<.05).

CONCLUSION: In Both of 2 methods, there was no statistically significant difference between male and female (P>.05). However, the lateral condylar inclinations of ARCUSdigma 2 were statistically significantly smaller than that of checkbite method (P<.05).

Å°¿öµå

ARCUSdigma 2; üũ¹ÙÀÌÆ®¹ý; °ú·Î°æ»ç°¢
ARCUSdigma 2; Checkbite method; Condyle inclination

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI
KoreaMed