比较美国牙科医师协会(USPHS)和美国牙科医师协会(FDI)利用临床和照片评估初级臼齿玻璃离聚体修复体的修订标准。

IF 2.3 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-10 DOI:10.1007/s40368-024-00892-9
N Larasati, M F Rizal, E Fauziah
{"title":"比较美国牙科医师协会(USPHS)和美国牙科医师协会(FDI)利用临床和照片评估初级臼齿玻璃离聚体修复体的修订标准。","authors":"N Larasati, M F Rizal, E Fauziah","doi":"10.1007/s40368-024-00892-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the applicability of modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) and FDI criteria for evaluating glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in primary posterior teeth through digital image analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This comparative analytic study was conducted at the Children's Dental Clinic RSKGM FKG UI, involving 40 GIC restorations on lower first primary molars in children aged 4-9 years. After cleaning, the restorations were assessed clinically using modified USPHS and FDI criteria before taking digital images, then the collected images were re-evaluated using both sets of criteria, and the clinical assessment results were compared to the digital image assessment results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the clinical evaluation of GIC restorations in primary teeth and their corresponding digital photographs when using the modified USPHS criteria, and although the use of FDI criteria yielded different results, these differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The assessment of GIC restorations through digital images aligns more closely with clinical assessments using the FDI criteria compared to the modified USPHS criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":47603,"journal":{"name":"European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":"367-373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing modified USPHS and FDI criteria for the assessment of glass ionomer restorations in primary molars utilising clinical and photographic evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"N Larasati, M F Rizal, E Fauziah\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40368-024-00892-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the applicability of modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) and FDI criteria for evaluating glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in primary posterior teeth through digital image analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This comparative analytic study was conducted at the Children's Dental Clinic RSKGM FKG UI, involving 40 GIC restorations on lower first primary molars in children aged 4-9 years. After cleaning, the restorations were assessed clinically using modified USPHS and FDI criteria before taking digital images, then the collected images were re-evaluated using both sets of criteria, and the clinical assessment results were compared to the digital image assessment results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the clinical evaluation of GIC restorations in primary teeth and their corresponding digital photographs when using the modified USPHS criteria, and although the use of FDI criteria yielded different results, these differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The assessment of GIC restorations through digital images aligns more closely with clinical assessments using the FDI criteria compared to the modified USPHS criteria.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47603,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"367-373\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-024-00892-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-024-00892-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:通过数字图像分析,比较修改后的美国公共卫生署(USPHS)和FDI标准在评估初级后牙玻璃离子粘固剂(GIC)修复体时的适用性:这项比较分析研究是在RSKGM FKG UI儿童牙科诊所进行的,涉及40名4-9岁儿童下第一乳磨牙的GIC修复体。清洁后,在拍摄数字图像前,使用修改后的 USPHS 和 FDI 标准对修复体进行临床评估,然后使用两套标准对收集的图像进行重新评估,并将临床评估结果与数字图像评估结果进行比较:统计分析表明,在使用修改后的 USPHS 标准时,基牙 GIC 修复体的临床评估结果与相应的数码照片之间存在显著差异;而使用 FDI 标准时,虽然结果有所不同,但这些差异在统计上并不显著:结论:与修改后的 USPHS 标准相比,使用 FDI 标准通过数字图像对 GIC 修复体进行评估与临床评估更为一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparing modified USPHS and FDI criteria for the assessment of glass ionomer restorations in primary molars utilising clinical and photographic evaluation.

Purpose: To compare the applicability of modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) and FDI criteria for evaluating glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in primary posterior teeth through digital image analysis.

Methods: This comparative analytic study was conducted at the Children's Dental Clinic RSKGM FKG UI, involving 40 GIC restorations on lower first primary molars in children aged 4-9 years. After cleaning, the restorations were assessed clinically using modified USPHS and FDI criteria before taking digital images, then the collected images were re-evaluated using both sets of criteria, and the clinical assessment results were compared to the digital image assessment results.

Results: Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the clinical evaluation of GIC restorations in primary teeth and their corresponding digital photographs when using the modified USPHS criteria, and although the use of FDI criteria yielded different results, these differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: The assessment of GIC restorations through digital images aligns more closely with clinical assessments using the FDI criteria compared to the modified USPHS criteria.

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
European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry
European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
81
期刊介绍: The aim and scope of European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD) is to promote research in all aspects of dentistry for children, including interceptive orthodontics and studies on children and young adults with special needs. The EAPD focuses on the publication and critical evaluation of clinical and basic science research related to children. The EAPD will consider clinical case series reports, followed by the relevant literature review, only where there are new and important findings of interest to Paediatric Dentistry and where details of techniques or treatment carried out and the success of such approaches are given.
期刊最新文献
Obesity/overweight and dental caries experience in children and adolescents: an umbrella review. Early detection of MIH in children by using artificial intelligence. WHO essential medicines for dentistry: a focus on patients with special care needs. A comparison of conventional sodium fluoride varnish and nano-sodium fluoride varnish regarding enamel microhardness of deciduous teeth: an in-vitro study. Restricted tongue mobility and ankyloglossia in 6-8-year-old Vietnamese school children: prevalence and association with tongue strength and endurance.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1