Assessment of Facial Esthetics among Non Dental Professionals, Orthodontists And Orthodontic Postgraduates : A Cross Sectional Study Original Research

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Oct 22, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56501/intjorthodrehabil.v15i3.1117
Keywords:
Survey, Non dental professional, Orthodontist, Orthodontic postgraduate, Photographs, Facial asymmetry, Nasolabial angle, Smile, Vertical facial height, Profile.

Main Article Content

Vaibhav TD
Postgraduate Resident, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai
https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1480-3455
Shahul Hameed Faizee
Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai
A. Jyosthna
Senior lecturer, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai
Xavier Dhayananth Lawrence
Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai
R. Sukanya
Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai

Abstract

Background: The aim of the present survey is to understand the subjective preference of non-dental professionals (NDP’s) with five parameters which can be modified by an orthodontist and compare it with the perception of orthodontists and orthodontic postgraduates. Four standard photographs of facial esthetics of 2 young woman were digitally modified using software and divided into 5 parameters (Asymmetry, nasolabial angle, smile, vertical facial height, profile). NDP’s differ from the subjective preference of orthodontist and postgraduates respectively.


Methods: A picture-based questionnaire survey edited in Adobe software was conducted for all the groups using google forms. Survey rendered 418 responses overall. The overall statistics was done using SPSS 22.0 version.


Results: NDP’s prefer 0 mm of facial asymmetry, 80° nasolabial angle, 0 and 2 mm of gingival exposure during smile, 1:1.14 ratio of middle to lower 1/3rd, 10° of convexity angle.


Conclusion: NDP’s, orthodontist and orthodontic postgraduates differ in their perception of facial esthetics.

Article Details

How to Cite
Vaibhav TD, Shahul Hameed Faizee, A. Jyosthna, Xavier Dhayananth Lawrence, & R. Sukanya. (2024). Assessment of Facial Esthetics among Non Dental Professionals, Orthodontists And Orthodontic Postgraduates : A Cross Sectional Study: Original Research. International Journal of Orthodontic Rehabilitation, 15(3), 62–82. https://doi.org/10.56501/intjorthodrehabil.v15i3.1117
Issue
Vol. 15 No. 3 (2024): International Journal Of Orthodontic Rehabilitation
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

References

Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972;24:285–90.

Van der Geld P, Oosterveld P, Van Heck G, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Smile attractiveness. Self-perception and influence on personality. Angle Orthod. 2007 Sep;77(5):759-65.

Reis SA, Abrão J, Capelozza Filho L, Claro CA. Análise facial subjetiva. Revista Dental Press de Ortodontia e Ortopedia Facial. 2006;11:159-72.

Silva BP, Jimenez-Castellanos E, Martinez-de-Fuentes R, Greenberg JR, Chu S. Laypersons' perception of facial and dental asymmetries. Int J Periodontics & Restorative Dent. 2013 Nov 1;33(6).

Broer PN, Juran S, Liu YJ, Weichman K, Tanna N, Walker ME, Ng R, Persing JA. The impact of geographic, ethnic, and demographic dynamics on the perception of beauty. J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Mar 1;25(2):e157-61.

Alhammadi MS. Perception of facial esthetics by laypersons, dental assistants, general dental practitioners and dental specialists. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019 Apr 1;20(3):304-10.

Bell R, Kiyak HA, Joondeph DR, McNeill RW, Wallen TR. Perceptions of facial profile and their influence on the decision to undergo orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod. 1985 Oct 1;88(4):323-32.

Prahl-Andersen B, Boersma H, Van der Linden FP, Moore AW. Perceptions of dentofacial morphology by laypersons, general dentists, and orthodontists. J Am Dent Assoc (1939). 1979 Feb 1;98(2):209-12.

Flores-Mir C, Silva E, Barriga MI, Lagravere MO, Major PW. Lay person's perception of smile aesthetics in dental and facial views. J Orthod. 2004 Sep;31(3):204-9.

Cochrane SM. Perceptions of facial appearance by orthodontists and the general public. J Clin Orthod, 1997; 31(3): 164–8.

McAvinchey G, Maxim F, Nix B, Djordjevic J, Linklater R, Landini G. The perception of facial asymmetry using 3-dimensional simulated images. Angle Orthod. 2014 Nov;84(6):957-65.

Ker, A.J.; Chan, R.; Fields, H.W.; Beck, M.; Rosenstiel, S. Esthetics and Smile Characteristics from the Layperson’s Perspective: A Computer-Based Survey Study. J Am Dent Assoc 2008, 139, 1318–27.

Silva, Bruno & Jiménez-Castellanos, Emilio & Martinez-de-Fuentes, Rafael & Greenberg, Joseph & Chu, Stephen. Laypersons’ Perception of Facial and Dental Asymmetries. Int J Perio Resto Dent. 2013. 33. e162-e171.

Naini FB, Donaldson AN, McDonald F, Cobourne MT. Assessing the influence of asymmetry affecting the mandible and chin point on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012 Jan;70(1):192-206.

Ioi H, Nakata S, Nakasima A, Counts AL. Anteroposterior lip positions of the most-favored Japanese facial profiles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Aug;128(2):206-11.

Jha N, Bamal R, Khairwa MK, Kalawat A, Yadav L, Sharma S. Evaluation of the Influence of Nasolabial Angle, Upper Sulcus Depth, and Nasal Tip Protrusion in the Perception of Facial Attractiveness. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Feb 1;16(Suppl 1):S329-34.

Mohammadi S, Eslamian L, Motamedian R. Nasolabial angle in profiles perceived as attractive: a scoping review. Iranian Journal of Orthodontics. 2020 Sep 1;15(2):1-7.

Sforza C, Laino A, D'Alessio R, Grandi G, Tartaglia GM, Ferrario VF. Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive and normal adolescent boys and girls. Angle Orthod. 2008 Sep 1;78(5):799-807.

Moore T, Southard KA, Casko JS, Qian F, Southard TE. Buccal corridors and smile esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005 Feb 1;127(2):208-13.

Hunt O, Johnston C, Hepper P, Burden D, Stevenson M. The influence of maxillary gingival exposure on dental attractiveness ratings. Eur J Orthod. 2002 Apr 1;24(2):199-204.

Kokich VO, Kokich VG, Kiyak HA. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: Asymmetric and symmetric situations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:141–51.

Yin L, Jiang M, Chen W, Smales RJ, Wang Q, Tang L. Differences in facial profile and dental esthetic perceptions between young adults and orthodontists. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145:750–6.

Abu Arqoub SH, Al-Khateeb SN. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. Eur J Orthod. 2011 Feb;33(1):103-11.

De Smit A, Dermaut L. Soft-tissue profile preference. Am J Orthod. 1984 Jul;86(1):67-73.

Loi H Yasutomi H, Nakata S Nakasima A, Counts A. Effect of lower facial vertical proportion on facial attractiveness in Japanese, Orthod Waves, 2006, vol. 65 pg. 161-5

Torsello F, Graci M, Grande NM, Deli R. Relationships between facial features in the perception of profile attractiveness. Prog Orthod. 2010;11(2):92-7.

Mejia-Maidl, Martha & Evans, Carla. Soft tissue facial considerations and orthodontic treatment. Semin Orthod. 2000 6. 3-20.

Kerr WJ, O'Donnell JM. Panel perception of facial attractiveness. Br J Orthod. 1990 Nov;17(4):299-304.

Mantizikos T. Esthetic soft tissue profile preferences among the Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Jul;114(1):1–7.