全无牙和部分无牙患者咀嚼能力和效率的评价

Patrícia Aleixo Dos Santos Domingos, Ana Luisa Botta Martins de Oliveira, Ariellen Amanda dos Reis
{"title":"全无牙和部分无牙患者咀嚼能力和效率的评价","authors":"Patrícia Aleixo Dos Santos Domingos, Ana Luisa Botta Martins de Oliveira, Ariellen Amanda dos Reis","doi":"10.19177/jrd.v5e2201732-39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This study aims to compare masticatory performance between total prosthesis users and individuals with partial or total natural dentition to evaluate masticatory capacity and efficiency in individuals in Araraquara/SP. Material and Methods: 31 individuals between 55 and 99 years old were evaluated, both genders, frequent users of Dentistry Clinic of the University of Araraquara (Uniara) and residents at Recanto Feliz, in the same town. A cognitive evaluation was carried out through a mini mental state examination in order to define inclusion criteria to individuals of sample. Next, a questionnaire was applied, with pre-coded questions on the masticatory capacity and an efficiency test, through the grinding test, where patients received 5 almonds to be grinded and not swallowed. The fragments were poured in granulometric sieves (2mm, 4mm and 4,75mm) to analyze the food fragmentation under tap water. Participants were divided into 3 groups: G1 (n=13) – superior and inferior total prosthesis user, or total or partial edentulous; G2 (n=4) – Total prosthesis user and/or partial removal prosthesis user (PRP) or partial dentition; and G3 (n=14) – complete or partial dentition or PRP user. Results: Efficiency test results showed the G1 patients presented good efficiency and 8 were considered poor; G2 patients were all classified as poor, and G3 patients were 9 poor, 2 regular and 3 good. Regarding to the questionnaires, most patients from the 3 groups felt impossibility to masticate some food, and need special preparation to chew. On take more time to masticate when compared to other people, all patients from G2 answered affirmatively, while only 46.1% G1 and 50% G3 gave the same answer.Just 15.4% G1 and 28.6% G2 are not satisfied with the tame they take.About avoid in front of other people, most patients from G2 and G3 use to, however, 69.2% G1 answered negatively. Regarding to the masticatory capacity self-evaluation, they answered regular. Conclusions: Masticatory efficiency of people using removable prosthesis did not achieve the ideal of a complete dentition. However, it is still better than in individuals with partial dentition or not rehabilitated.","PeriodicalId":213881,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Dentistry","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of masticatory capacity and efficiency in total and partial edentulous patients in Araraquara\",\"authors\":\"Patrícia Aleixo Dos Santos Domingos, Ana Luisa Botta Martins de Oliveira, Ariellen Amanda dos Reis\",\"doi\":\"10.19177/jrd.v5e2201732-39\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: This study aims to compare masticatory performance between total prosthesis users and individuals with partial or total natural dentition to evaluate masticatory capacity and efficiency in individuals in Araraquara/SP. Material and Methods: 31 individuals between 55 and 99 years old were evaluated, both genders, frequent users of Dentistry Clinic of the University of Araraquara (Uniara) and residents at Recanto Feliz, in the same town. A cognitive evaluation was carried out through a mini mental state examination in order to define inclusion criteria to individuals of sample. Next, a questionnaire was applied, with pre-coded questions on the masticatory capacity and an efficiency test, through the grinding test, where patients received 5 almonds to be grinded and not swallowed. The fragments were poured in granulometric sieves (2mm, 4mm and 4,75mm) to analyze the food fragmentation under tap water. Participants were divided into 3 groups: G1 (n=13) – superior and inferior total prosthesis user, or total or partial edentulous; G2 (n=4) – Total prosthesis user and/or partial removal prosthesis user (PRP) or partial dentition; and G3 (n=14) – complete or partial dentition or PRP user. Results: Efficiency test results showed the G1 patients presented good efficiency and 8 were considered poor; G2 patients were all classified as poor, and G3 patients were 9 poor, 2 regular and 3 good. Regarding to the questionnaires, most patients from the 3 groups felt impossibility to masticate some food, and need special preparation to chew. On take more time to masticate when compared to other people, all patients from G2 answered affirmatively, while only 46.1% G1 and 50% G3 gave the same answer.Just 15.4% G1 and 28.6% G2 are not satisfied with the tame they take.About avoid in front of other people, most patients from G2 and G3 use to, however, 69.2% G1 answered negatively. Regarding to the masticatory capacity self-evaluation, they answered regular. Conclusions: Masticatory efficiency of people using removable prosthesis did not achieve the ideal of a complete dentition. However, it is still better than in individuals with partial dentition or not rehabilitated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":213881,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research in Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research in Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.19177/jrd.v5e2201732-39\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19177/jrd.v5e2201732-39","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较全义齿使用者与部分或全部天然牙列个体的咀嚼性能,以评估Araraquara/SP个体的咀嚼能力和效率。材料和方法:对31名年龄在55岁至99岁之间的人进行了评估,这些人包括经常使用阿拉卡拉大学牙科诊所(Uniara)的人和同一城镇Recanto Feliz的居民。通过小型精神状态检查进行认知评估,以确定样本个体的纳入标准。接下来,使用一份调查问卷,其中包含预先编码的咀嚼能力问题和效率测试,通过研磨测试,患者收到5颗杏仁,研磨后不吞下。将碎块倒入2mm、4mm和4,75mm的颗粒筛中,分析自来水下的食物碎块。参与者分为3组:G1组(n=13) -使用全义齿者或全无牙或部分无牙者;G2 (n=4) -全义齿使用者和/或部分移除义齿使用者(PRP)或部分牙列;G3 (n=14) -全牙列或部分牙列或PRP使用者。结果:疗效试验结果显示G1患者疗效好,8例疗效差;G2患者均为差,G3患者为差9例,一般2例,良好3例。在问卷调查中,三组患者大多感觉无法咀嚼某些食物,需要特别准备才能咀嚼。在咀嚼时间方面,G2组患者的回答都是肯定的,而G1组和G3组分别只有46.1%和50%的患者回答是肯定的。只有15.4%的G1和28.6%的G2不满意自己的待遇。关于避免在他人面前使用,G2和G3的大多数患者使用,而G1的69.2%的患者回答是否定的。对于咀嚼能力的自我评价,他们回答有规律。结论:使用活动义齿的人咀嚼效率不能达到理想的全牙列。然而,它仍然比部分牙列或未修复的个体更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of masticatory capacity and efficiency in total and partial edentulous patients in Araraquara
Aim: This study aims to compare masticatory performance between total prosthesis users and individuals with partial or total natural dentition to evaluate masticatory capacity and efficiency in individuals in Araraquara/SP. Material and Methods: 31 individuals between 55 and 99 years old were evaluated, both genders, frequent users of Dentistry Clinic of the University of Araraquara (Uniara) and residents at Recanto Feliz, in the same town. A cognitive evaluation was carried out through a mini mental state examination in order to define inclusion criteria to individuals of sample. Next, a questionnaire was applied, with pre-coded questions on the masticatory capacity and an efficiency test, through the grinding test, where patients received 5 almonds to be grinded and not swallowed. The fragments were poured in granulometric sieves (2mm, 4mm and 4,75mm) to analyze the food fragmentation under tap water. Participants were divided into 3 groups: G1 (n=13) – superior and inferior total prosthesis user, or total or partial edentulous; G2 (n=4) – Total prosthesis user and/or partial removal prosthesis user (PRP) or partial dentition; and G3 (n=14) – complete or partial dentition or PRP user. Results: Efficiency test results showed the G1 patients presented good efficiency and 8 were considered poor; G2 patients were all classified as poor, and G3 patients were 9 poor, 2 regular and 3 good. Regarding to the questionnaires, most patients from the 3 groups felt impossibility to masticate some food, and need special preparation to chew. On take more time to masticate when compared to other people, all patients from G2 answered affirmatively, while only 46.1% G1 and 50% G3 gave the same answer.Just 15.4% G1 and 28.6% G2 are not satisfied with the tame they take.About avoid in front of other people, most patients from G2 and G3 use to, however, 69.2% G1 answered negatively. Regarding to the masticatory capacity self-evaluation, they answered regular. Conclusions: Masticatory efficiency of people using removable prosthesis did not achieve the ideal of a complete dentition. However, it is still better than in individuals with partial dentition or not rehabilitated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信