Harshit Naik¹*, Kalpesh Patel² and Nikunj Patel³

¹Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Manubhai Patel Dental College, Hospital and ORI, Vaodara, Gujarat, India
²HOD and Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Manubhai Patel Dental College, Hospital and ORI, Vaodara, Gujarat, India
³Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Manubhai Patel Dental College, Hospital and ORI, Vaodara, Gujarat, India

*Corresponding Author: Harshit Naik, Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Manubhai Patel Dental College, Hospital and ORI, Vaodara, Gujarat, India.

Received: March 23, 2022; Published: May 23, 2022

Abstract

Objective: Smile aesthetic is a major concern among patients and orthodontists. The aim of the study was to evaluate the perception of different smile attributes amongst laypersons and orthodontists in treated class II malocclusion cases and to analyze the pre- and post-treatment smile in treated class II division I cases in comparison to ideal smile on VSA (Visual Analog Scale).

Methods: A cross sectional comparative study which was done to compare the macro attributes of smile esthetics such as alignment, large size incisor, incisal show, smile, exposure of gingiva, tooth and gingival colour. 22 laypersons and 22 orthodontists were surveyed in the study. Pre- treatment (Figure-1) and post-treatment(Figure-2) smile photograph of class II division I treated patients were obtained from the

departmental records. The smile photographs were shown to the laypersons and orthodontists. The visual analogue scale was given to each to rate it from 0 to 10, with 0 being least attractive to 10 being most attractive. The patients and orthodontists were also asked to state the reason for their rating.

Results: the average smile rating is higher for the laypersons which is even statistically significant [p-value < 0.05], at 5% level of significance. Findings suggested that the average smile and the distribution of smile esthetics is not same across the groups, that is, it varies between the groups. The results were statistically significant [p- value < 0.005] at 5% level of significance, on the basis of p-value further indicating the rejection of null hypothesis.

Conclusion: The group conducting strict smile assessment was the Orthodontist group. The average smile and the distribution of smile esthetics is not same across the groups, that is, it varies between the groups. The results were statistically significant.

Keywords: Smile Analysis; Smile Aesthetic; Macro Aesthetic; Orthodontist; Layperson

References

1. William R Proffit., et al. “Contemporary Orthodontics”. Fourth Edition 189-190.
2. Rodrigues CDT., et al. “The perception of smile attractiveness”. The Angle Orthodontist 79 (2009): 634-639.
3. Ward DH. “Proportional smile design using the recurring esthetic dental (red) proportion”. Dental Clinics of North America 1 (2001): 143-154.
4. Scott RC., et al. “Influence of lips on the perception of malocclusion”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 130 (2006): 152-162.
5. Vyas MB. “Clinical photography in dentistry; First
6. Vincent K and Asuma K. “Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics”. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 11 (1999): 311-324.
7. C Flores-Mir., et al. “Lay person’s perception of smile aesthetics in dental and facial views”. Journal of Orthodontics 31 (2004): 204-209.
8. Cotrim ER., et al. “Perception of adults’ smile esthetics among orthodontists, clinicians and laypeople”. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 1 (2015): 40-44.
9. Van der Geld P., et al. “Smile line assessment comparing quantitative measurement and visual estimation”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2 (2011): 174-180.
10. Amjad Al Taki., et al. “Perceptions of Altered Smile Esthetics: A Comparative Evaluation in Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypersons”. International Journal of Dentistry (2016): 1-11.

Citation

Citation: Harshit Naik., et al. “Analysis of Smile Perception in Laypersons and Orthodontists: A Cross Sectional Comparative Study". Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 6.6 (2022): 107-110.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Harshit Naik., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.