| Objectives1The cognition of oral health education in patients with survey.2To implant repair patients establish personalized health education intervention model, in order to improve the patients’ oral care behavior ability.3Discuss the influence on individualized health education around the peri-implantitis mobidity situation.MethodsThis study adopts the method of experimental research, in January2010to September2011will be affiliated stomatological hospital of tianjin international medical center of nankai university postoperative3months to grow to repair the patients as the research object, according to the principle of informed consent will be110research subjects were randomly divided into intervention group and control group. Control group patients received conventional health education, intervention group patients received individualized health education. Grow in complete repair after1,3,6, and12months respectively to implant in patients with gingival sulcus bleeding index (SBI), probing depth (PD), plaque index (PLI), and X-ray showed bone resorption, implant loosening degrees inspections, to compare two groups of patients with infection rates of around the implant.Results1Through investigating the situation of patients on oral health education cognition, the result showed that103patients (93.6%) thout that health education is very important, and there are97patients (88.2%) thout that health education is important to oral health care function. But there were76patients (69.1%) did not accept oral health education;40patients (36.4%) were not satisfied with the current form of oral health education;65patients (59.1%) thout that normal oral health education can’t meet the need. When patients choose their oral health education forms, 32patients chose popular science lectures and36patients chose gratuitous treatment, which occupied29.1%and32.7%respectively.2After1months of intervention, intervention group patients oral condition maintenance good, among them2patients appeared the SBI improvements. SBI of1patient among control group is positive, three patients increased PLI, PD is higher than the baseline measurement results but no difference (P>0.05); According to peri-implantitis diagnosis standard the intervention group patients after1month without happening, control group appeared peri-implantitis in1case (1.8%), patients with a diagnosis of around the implant mucositis, not present implant bone integration part of the loss and implant loosening.3Intervention after3months of intervention group patients oral condition maintenance good,1case of patients with PLI, SBI condition improved,1patients positive (1.8%), PD has no obvious change.2patients of control group is positive of SBI (3.6%),3cases with PLI increase5.5%, PD is higher than baseline but there was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05); According to peri-implantitis diagnosis standard the intervention group patients after3months without the occurrence of peri-implantitis, the control appears2cases (3.6%) patients, which were diagnosed with around implant mucositis, not present implant bone integration part of the loss and implant loosening.4Intervention6months after the intervention group1patients appeared the SBI positive (1.8%),2patients appeared PLI, PD has no obvious change;2patients of the control group werepositive with the SBI (5.5%), PLI increase observed in3patients (5.5%), PD is significantly higher than baseline, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). According to peri-implantitis diagnosis standard the intervention group and control group respectively,1case appeared around the implant patients and2patients accounted for1.8%and3.6%respectively, were diagnosed with around implant mucositis, not present implant bone integration part of the loss and implant loosening.512months after intervention, the intervention group appeared2cases with the SBI positive (3.6%), PLI increase observed in5patients (9.1%), PD is higher than the baseline, but there was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05);5cases of control group patients with the SBI is positive accounted for9.1%, PLI positive observed in5patients (9.1%), PD is higher than the baseline and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). According to peri-implantitis diagnosis standard intervention group and control group respectively around implant infection in2cases and5patients with3.6%and9.1%respectively, with the control group1patients diagnosed with inflammation around implant, implant bone integration of partial loss, measured2.6mm and implant I loose degrees, the rest are diagnosed with around implant mucositis, not present implant bone integration part of the loss and implant loosening.612months after the intervention,3cases (5.5%) of the intervention group patients got peri-implanttitis,while10cases (18.2%)of the control group got the same disease, compared to the two groups, the results showed that the incidence of peri-implantitis of intervention group is lower than the control group, the difference was statistically significant (χ2=4.27,P<0.05).7Male patients in control group with7cases (29.2%) occurred peri-implantitis, more than women patients with3cases (9.7%), there was no statistically significant difference (χ2=3.454, P>0.05).2cases (3.6%) of male patients in the intervention group occurred peri-implantitis, more than women patients with1case (1.8%), after comparing to the control group,the results showed that the incidence of peri-implantitis with no obvious difference to men and women, there was no statistically significant difference(χ2=0.012,P>0.05).8This study results show that low degree of culture of people, around the implant infection of patients with onset number more than the high cultural degree, this study high school the following people (including high school) combined with high school above culture merging crowd were compared, the result was no significant difference between intervention group while while the control group patients with low degree of culture, the morbidity number is significantly higher than the high degree culture of patients, with statistical difference (χ2=4.583, P<0.05). 93patients (5.5%) with family per capita income less than3000yuan in the control group got peri-implantitis,3patients (5.5%) with income3000～50000yuan got the same disease,4patients (7.3%) with income about more than5000yuan in onset; In intervention group family per capita income is less than3000yuan in1case (1.8%) with onset, income is3000～50000yuan1cases (1.8%), income is more than5000yuan in1patient (1.8%). The result shows that both the control group and intervention group, the incidence of income peri-implantitis with inflammatory less obvious influences, and there was no statistically significant difference (χ2=0.79,P>0.05)Conclusions1Though the oral health education in patients with cognitive situation investigation, the result showed the patient’s desire for the oral health education and diversified demand of content and form.2Individualized health education which was applied to patients with implant prosthesis, effectively improve the patient’s periodontal condition and the ability of patients with oral care behavior.3Compared to routine health education targeted, individualized health education was more easily accepted by patients. after the intervention in intervention group patients, the maintain of the implanting restoration is better than control group in the SBI, PLI, PD etc. And the mobidity situation in the intervention group is less than the control gooup. |
PDF Full Text Request