ProTaper를 사용한 다양한 hybrid instrumentation methods의 근관성형 효율 비교

The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the shaping abilities of various hybrid instrumentation method using constant tapered file systems with $ProTaper\^{(R)}$ S1 and the difference between experts and inexperienced clinicians in use of NiTi file. Three hybrid methods used in this study were composed of $ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;K-Flexofile\^{(R)}\;(group S),\;ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;HeroShaper\^{(R)}\;(group\;H),\;and\;ProTaper\^{(R)}\;S1\;and\;ProFile\^{(R)}\;(group\;P)$respectively. The $ProTaper\^{(R)}$-alone method (group C) was introduced as a control group. After canal preparation, the lapse of time was recorded. The images of pre- and post-operative canal were scanned and superimposed. Amounts of instrumented canal widths and centering ratio were measured at apical 1, 2 and 3 mm levels and statistical analysis was performed In this study. both of the group C and S took more time to prepare canals than other groups, Inexperienced operators required more time for the entire preparation with the groups C and H than the experienced (p