The midline from the perspective of the layperson and dental surgeon

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35699/2178-1990.2021.25127

Resumo

Aim: The objective of this research was to evaluate the midline from the perspectives of the layperson and the dental surgeon.

Methods: The survey was conducted from August to December 2018 in Parnaíba, PI, Brazil. An image of a female smile was used, in which changes were made in the upper dental midline, every 1 mm up to 4 mm, and in the incisal angulation, every 5 degrees up to 15 degrees, to the left side. The images were cut and formed into two groups, one showing a smile with no lip filter (G1) and another with a smile with a lip filter (G2). These were then shown to 334 lay people and 25 dentists for evaluation with scores from 0 to 10, with scores from 0 to 5.9 for an unacceptable smile and from 6 to 10 for an acceptable smile.

Results: Dental surgeons were more critical when analyzing the images and detected deviations from 1mm and 5 degrees in both groups G1 and G2. Laypeople noticed deviations from 2mm and 15 degrees on G1 and deviations from 3mm and 10 degrees on G2.

Conclusion: Dental surgeons and laypeople are able to assess midline deviations with the minimum deviation present. Dentists were more critical in detecting midline deviation when analyzing photos.

Uniterms: Esthetics, dental. Smiling. Orthodontics.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Saffarpour A, Ghavam M, Saffarpour A, Dayani R, Fard MJK. Perception of laypeople and dental professionals of smile esthetics. J Dent (Tehran). 2016;13(2):85-91.

Richards MR, Fields Jr HW, Beck FM, Firestone AR, Walther DB, Rosenstiel S, et al. Contribution of malocclusion and female facial attractiveness to smile esthetics evaluated by eye tracking. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(4):472–82.

Rosa M, Olimpo A, Fastuca R, Caprioglio A. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypeople to altered dental esthetics in cases with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors. Prog Orthod. 2013;14(1):1-7.

Priyadharshni S, Felicita AS. Prevalence of maxillary midline shift in female patients reported to Saveetha Dental College. Drugs Inv Today. 2019;11(1):77-80.

Pithon MM, Nascimento CC, Barbosa GC, Coqueiro RS. Do dental esthetics have any influence on finding a job. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;146(4):423–9.

Hata k, Arai K. Dimensional analyses of frontal posed smile attractiveness in Japanese female patients. Angle Othod. 2016;86(1):127-34.

Daou R, Aki R, Ghoubril J, Khoury E. Influence of the vertical position of maxillary lateral incisors on the perception of smile esthetics among dentists, orthodontists and laypersons: a computerized simulated photographic assessment. I A J D. 2019;10(1):19-24.

Fontelles MJ, Simões MG, Almeida JC, Fontelles RGS. Research methodology: guidelines for calculating the sample size. Rev Paran Med. 2010;24(2):57-64.

Peres MA, Traebert J, Marcenes W. Calibration of examiners for dental caries epidemiology studies. Cad Saude Publica. 2001;17(1):153-9.

Ferreira JB, Silva LE, Caetano MTO, Motta AFJ, Cury-Saramago AA, Mucha JN. Perception of midline deviations in smile esthetics by laypersons. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016;21(6):51-7.

Machado RM, Duarte MEA, Motta AFJ, Mucha JN, Motta AT. Variations between maxillary central and lateral incisal edges and smile attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;150(3):425–35.

Duarte MEA, Machado RM, Motta AFJ, Mucha JN, Motta AT. Morphological simulation of different incisal embrasures: perception of laypersons, orthodontic patients, general dentists and orthodontists. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2016;29(1):1-11.

Johnston DK, Smith RJ. Smile esthetic after orthodontic treatment with and without extraction of four first premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1995;108(2):162-7.

Kokich Jr VO, Asuman Kiyak H, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentist and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent. 1999;11(6):311-24.

Zhang YF, Xiao L, Li J, Peng Y, Zhao Z. Young people’s esthetic perception of dental midline deviation. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(3):515-20.

Pinho S, Ciriaco C, Faber J, Lenza CMA. Impact of dental asymmetries on the perception of smile esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132(6):748-53.

Cotrim ER, Vasconcelos Jr AV, Haddad ACSS, Reis SAB. Perception of adults’ smile esthetics among orthodontists, clinicians and laypeople. Dent Press J Orthod. 2015;20(1):40-4.

Williams RP, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo TG. Perceptions of midline deviations among different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145(2):249–55.

Oliveira PLE, Motta AFJ, Guerra CJ, Mucha JN. Comparison of two scales for evaluation of smile and dental attractiveness. Dental Press Journal Orthod. 2015;20(2):42-8.

Thomas JL, Hayes C, Zawaideh S. The effect of axial midline angulation on dental esthetic. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(4):359-64.

Downloads

Publicado

2021-09-26

Como Citar

Ana de Lourdes, A. de L. S. de L., Araújo , Ítalo I. de C., & Araújo, I. Íris de C. (2021). The midline from the perspective of the layperson and dental surgeon. Arquivos Em Odontologia, 57, 132–140. https://doi.org/10.35699/2178-1990.2021.25127

Edição

Seção

Artigos