Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

µÎ°¡Áö ÇÇ¿¡Á¶ ¿£ÁøÀÇ »ç¿ëÀÚ ¸¸Á·µµ ºñ±³

A comparative study on the user satisfaction between two different piezoelectric engines

±¸°­È¸º¹ÀÀ¿ë°úÇÐÁö 2017³â 33±Ç 4È£ p.269 ~ 277
ÀÓÇö¹Ì, À̱Ժ¹, À̿ϼ±, ÃÖ¼Ò¿µ,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
ÀÓÇö¹Ì ( Lim Hyun-Mi ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ ´ëÇпø Ä¡ÀÇÇаú
À̱Ժ¹ ( Lee Kyu-Bok ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Ã¶Çб³½Ç
À̿ϼ± ( Lee Wan-Sun ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ ÷´ÜÄ¡°úÀÇ·á±â±â°³¹ß¿¬±¸¼Ò
ÃÖ¼Ò¿µ ( Choi So-Young ) - °æºÏ´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ ±¸°­¾Ç¾È¸é¿Ü°úÇб³½Ç

Abstract

¸ñÀû: Ä¡°úÀÇ»çÀÇ »ç¿ë ¸¸Á·µµ ºñ±³¸¦ ÅëÇØ µÎ °¡Áö ÇÇ¿¡Á¶ ¿£ÁøÀÇ ¼º´ÉÀ» ºñ±³Æò°¡ ÇÏ°íÀÚ ÇÑ´Ù.

¿¬±¸ Àç·á ¹× ¹æ¹ý: º» ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â µÎ °¡ÁöÀÇ ÇÇ¿¡Á¶ ¿£ÁøÀ» Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù:TRAUS XUS10 (Saeshin), PIEZOSURGERY touch (Mectron). 20¸íÀÇ Ä¡°úÀǻ簡 11°³ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡ ´äÇÏ¿´°í, Æò°¡°á°ú´Â LikertÀÇ 5Á¡ ôµµ¸¦ Àû¿ëÇÏ¿© ¼öÄ¡È­ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÇÚµåÇǽº ¼ÒÀ½Æò°¡´Â 10ÃÊ µ¿¾È 5ȸ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© ÃÖ°í¼ÒÀ½À» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÇÚµåÇǽº ¹ß¿­Æò°¡´Â ¼¼ ºÎÀ§¿¡¼­ 3ºÐµ¿¾ÈÀǹ߿­·®À» ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á°ú: Æò°¡Ç׸ñ Áß ¡®ÁÖ¼öÆßÇÁ ¸ðÅÍÀÇ ¼ÒÀ½¡¯¿¡¼­ TRAUS XUS10ÀÌ PIEZOSURGERY touchº¸´Ù À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô ¸¸Á·µµ°¡ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ¹Ý¸é, ¡®±â´ÉkeyÀÇ ¸¸Á·µµ¡¯¿Í ¡®ÇÚµåÇǽº ¹ß¿­Á¤µµ¡¯´Â PIEZOSURGERY touch°¡ ´õ ¿ì¼öÇß´Ù. ¼ÒÀ½ ÃÖ´ë°ªÀº TRAUS XUS10ÀÌ 56.6 dB, PIEZOSURGERY touch´Â 56.0 dB¿´´Ù. µÎ ±â±â ¸ðµÎ 3ºÐ ÀÛµ¿ ÈÄ 41¡ÆC ¹Ì¸¸ÀÇ ¿­À» ¹ß»ý½ÃÅ´À¸·Î½á ¾ÈÀü±âÁØÀ» ¸¸Á·ÇÏ¿´´Ù.

°á·Ð: TRAUS XUS10´Â ¡®±â´É key¡¯ ¹× ¡®ÇÚµåÇǽº ¹ß¿­Á¤µµ¡¯¿¡¼­ ¾à°£ÀÇ °³¼±À» ÇÑ´Ù¸é ±× ¿Ü ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ Æò°¡Ç׸ñ¿¡¼­´Â PIEZOSURGERY touch°ú °ßÁÙ¸¸ÇÑ ¼º´ÉÀ» º¸ÀδÙ.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the performance of two piezoelectric engine systems by surveying satisfaction from dental clinicians.

Materials and Methods: Two piezoelectric systems were evaluated: TRAUS XUS10 (Saeshin), PIEZOSURGERY touch (Mectron). For this study, 20 dentists responded to the 11 questionnaires in which 5 point Likert-type scale was used. The two devices were operated for 10 seconds and measured 5 times to compare the maximum noise values. In heat emission test, the handpiece was operated for 3 minutes and heat was measured at three positions each.

Results: TRAUS XUS10 had higher satisfaction level on motor noise (P < 0.05). About function key and handpiece heat generation, PIEZOSURGERY touch showed higher satisfaction (P < 0.05) than TRAUS XUS10. The maximum noise level for each of the devices was confirmed to be 56.6 dB for the TRAUS XUS10 and 56.0 dB for PIEZOSURGERY touch. The two piezoelectric engines satisfied the safety standards with an operation temperature below 41¡ÆC after having been operated for 3 minutes.

Conclusion: Except for the function key and handpiece heat emission, TRAUS XUS10 has comparable performance with PIEZOSURGERY touch.

Å°¿öµå

ÇÇ¿¡Á¶ ¿£Áø; ¸¸Á·µµ; ¿­¹ß»ý; ÇÚµåÇǽº ¼ÒÀ½
piezoelectric engine; satisfaction; heat emission; handpiece noise

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI