| 000 | 03719cam a2200349 a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | EG-GiCUC | ||
| 005 | 20250223032033.0 | ||
| 008 | 180825s2017 ua dh f m 000 0 eng d | ||
| 040 |
_aEG-GiCUC _beng _cEG-GiCUC |
||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 049 | _aDeposite | ||
| 097 | _aPh.D | ||
| 099 | _aCai01.09.09.Ph.D.2017.Do.E | ||
| 100 | 0 | _aDoaa Mahmoud Abdelhamid Elkady | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 |
_aEffect of single impression technique versus split cast impression technique on speech outcome in maxillary obturators / _cDoaa Mahmoud Abdelhamid Elkady ; Supervised Cecil Gorgey , Ahmed Emad Fayyad , Heba Mahmoud Farag |
| 246 | 1 | 5 | _aتأثير طريقة الطبعة المفردة مقارنة بطريقة الطبعة مع استخدام القالب المشطور علي الناتج التخاطبى للسدات الفكية العلوية |
| 260 |
_aCairo : _bDoaa Mahmoud Abdelhamid Elkady , _c2017 |
||
| 300 |
_a112 P. : _bcharts , facsimiles ; _c25cm |
||
| 502 | _aThesis (Ph.D.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Prosthodontics | ||
| 520 | _aThis study was conducted to evaluate the effect of using two different impression techniques on speech and patient satisfaction outcomes in maxillary definitive obturators constructed for patients with hard and soft palatal defects. Six patients were selected from the Maxillofacial Prosthodontics Unit, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University or referred from The National Cancer Institute. These patients exhibited unilateral hard palatal defect with complete absence of the soft palate. The selected patients were randomly distributed into two equal groups: Group I: The patients received first definitive skeleton obturator constructed according to the single impression technique then evaluation of speech outcome and patient satisfaction were carried out one week after the prosthesis insertion and then one month later. The prosthesis was then taken off from the patient for another one week and the obturator bulb was modified with the split cast impression technique. Group II: The patients received first definitive skeleton obturator constructed according to the split cast impression technique then evaluation of speech outcome and patient satisfaction were carried out one week after the prosthesis insertion and one month later, the prosthesis was then taken off from the patient for another one week and the obturator bulb was modified to accept the single impression technique. The protocol of assessment included: I. Auditory perceptual assessment of speech by the aid of phoniatric. II. Acoustic analysis of speech using : A) Spectrogram to evaluate the following parameters; 1. Energy.2. Duration. 3. VOT (Voice onset time). B)Nasometer to evaluate the degree of nasalance. III. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a patient satisfaction questionnaire which included the following questions: How would you evaluate the progress had been made with the prosthesis regarding the function? How would you rate the performance of the obturator regarding the retention? How would you rate the performance of the obturator regarding the stability? How much would you are satisfied with the comfort of the prosthesis? How much improvement you found in pronouncing words? | ||
| 530 | _aIssued also as CD | ||
| 653 | 4 | _aCast impression technique | |
| 653 | 4 | _aImpression technique versus | |
| 653 | 4 | _aMaxillary obturators | |
| 700 | 0 |
_aAhmed Emad Fayyad , _eSupervisor |
|
| 700 | 0 |
_aCecil Gorgey , _eSupervisor |
|
| 700 | 0 |
_aHeba Mahmoud Farag , _eSupervisor |
|
| 856 | _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf | ||
| 905 |
_aNazla _eRevisor |
||
| 905 |
_aShimaa _eCataloger |
||
| 942 |
_2ddc _cTH |
||
| 999 |
_c67122 _d67122 |
||