Assessment of objective and subjective measures as indicators for facial esthetics

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 1, 2016
https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.195107
Download
pdf
Statistic

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Volume 8, Issue 3, September-December 2016

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Baldeep Singh
Department of Orthodontics, Rama Dental College and Hospital, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh
Harsimran Kaur
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh
Anna Vaz
Department of Orthodontics, PMNM Dental College, Bagalkot, Karnataka
K Vinod
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Triveni Institute of Dental Sciences, Hospital and Research Centre, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
Lavina Taneja
Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, SGT Dental College and Hospital, Gurgaon, Haryana
Shashank Gaikwad
Department of Orthodontics, Mahatama Gandhi Missions Dental College and Hospital, Kamothe, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra

Abstract

Background: The study mentioned was aimed to examine the contribution of the objective measures representing anterior-posterior (AP) and vertical characteristics, dental esthetics, or their combination that are used in daily orthodontic practice in the assessment of the facial esthetics. Materials and Methods: A panel of 64 laypersons evaluated the facial esthetics of 32 boys and 32 girls, stratified over four different angle classes, on a visual analog scale. The relationship between the objective parameters and facial esthetics was evaluated by the backward multiple regression analysis. Results: Dental esthetics, expressed by the esthetic component of the index of orthodontic treatment need (AC/IOTN), appeared to be the most vital indicator for facial esthetics. The horizontal sum, a variable for AP characteristics of the patient, could be a better variable when compared with the overjet. Conclusion: Addition of this newly defined parameter to the AC/IOTN improved the prognostic value from 25% to 35%.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Baldeep Singh, Harsimran Kaur, Anna Vaz, K Vinod, Lavina Taneja, & Shashank Gaikwad. (2016). Assessment of objective and subjective measures as indicators for facial esthetics. Journal of Forensic Dental Sciences, 8(3), 139–144. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.195107
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Dorsey J, Karabik K. Social and psychological motivations for orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1977;72:460.
  2. Shaw WC, Gbe MJ, Jones BM. The expectations of orthodontic patients in South Wales and St. Louis, Missouri. Br J Orthod 1979;6:203‑5.
  3. Tulloch C, Phillips C, Dann C 4th. Cephalometric measures as indicators of facial attractiveness. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1993;8:171-9.
  4. Shaw WC, Rees G, Dawe M, Charles CR. The influence of dentofacial appearance on the social attractiveness of young adults. Am J Orthod 1985;87:21‑6.
  5. Kiekens RM, Maltha JC, van’t Hof MA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Objective measures as indicators for facial esthetics in white adolescents. Angle Orthod 2006;76:551‑6.
  6. De SmitA, Dermaut L. Soft‑tissue profile preference. Am J Orthod 1984;86:67‑73.
  7. Phillips C, Griffin T, Bennett E. Perception of facial attractiveness by patients, peers, and professionals. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1995;10:127-35.
  8. Cochrane SM, Cunningham SJ, Hunt NP. A comparison of the perception of facial profile by the general public and 3 groups of clinicians. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1999;14:291-5.
  9. Evans R, Shaw W. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 1987;9:314‑8.
  10. Howells DJ, Shaw WC. The validity and reliability of ratings of dental and facial attractiveness for epidemiologic use. Am J Orthod 1985;88:402-8.
  11. Kerr WJ, O’Donnell JM. Panel perception of facial attractiveness. Br J Orthod 1990;17:299-304.
  12. Matoula S, Pancherz H. Skeletofacial morphology of attractive and nonattractive faces. Angle Orthod 2006;76:204‑10.
  13. Romani KL, Agahi F, Nanda R, Zernik JH. Evaluation of horizontal and vertical differences in facial profiles by orthodontists and lay people. Angle Orthod 1993;63:175‑82.
  14. Michiels G, Sather AH. Determinants of facial attractiveness in a sample of white women. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1994;9:95-103.
  15. MugonzibwaEA, Kuijpers-JagtmanAM, van’t HofMA, KikwiluEN. Comparison between the opinions of Tanzanian parents and their children on dental attractiveness. Angle Orthod 2004;74:63‑70.
  16. Johansson AM, Follin ME. Evaluation of the aesthetic component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need by Swedish orthodontists. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:160‑6.