Perceived relative attractiveness of facial profiles with varying degrees of skeletal anomalies.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to answer the following questions: Are profiles of Class I patients perceived as more attractive than profiles of Class II or Class III patients in Germany today? How pronounced must a skeletal malocclusion be to be perceived as less attractive? Are there differences in perception between dentists and laypersons?

MATERIAL AND METHOD

For the present study we examined seven patients with skeletal Class I, orthognathic maxillae and mandibles, and straight average faces (ideal biometric face as defined by A. M. Schwarz). Using the Onyx Ceph software, their profile lines were modified to reflect three different Class II profile variants and three different Class III profile variants. The 49 profiles thus obtained were assigned to two groups. Group 1 comprised the seven straight average faces and the first part of the retrognathic and prognathic profile variants. Group 2 comprised the same seven straight average faces and the remaining retrognathic and prognathic profile variants. Both groups of faces were scored by 130 laypersons and 126 dentists.

RESULTS

Both groups of observers perceived the seven straight average faces similarly both in the first and second (subsequent) scoring rounds. The straight average face was perceived as most attractive by laypersons (mean, 5.48; 95% confidence interval (CI:) 5.33-5.60) and dentists (mean, 5.44; 95% CI, 5.28-5.50) alike, followed by the mildest variant of the retrognathic face (laypersons, mean, 4.85; 95% CI, 4.68-5.01; dentists, mean, 4.98; 95% CI, 4.81-5.10). Dentists differentiated more clearly by degree of skeletal malocclusion than did laypersons. Both groups alike perceived the extreme variant of the prognathic and retrognathic profile lines as the least attractive. Grouping the subjects by gender yielded only minor differences in perception.

CONCLUSION

The straight average face is perceived as most attractive by representative German populations today. Dentists make clearer gradual distinctions in their perceptions than do laypersons.