Advance Education in General Dentistry, Comprehensive Dentistry Department, College of Dentistry, Texas A&M University, Dallas, TX.
Graduate in Prosthodontics, Restorative Dentistry Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
J Prosthodont. 2020 Jul;29(6):466-471. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13182. Epub 2020 Jun 21.
To analyze the perceptions of laypersons, dental students, and dentists regarding disparities of the maxillary dental midline and the occlusal plane (OP) when analyzing their own 2D or 3D clinical simulation.
20 participants per group volunteered (N = 60). Intraoral and facial scans, and a photograph were obtained from each participant. Two simulation groups were created: 2D and 3D groups, which were subdivided into two subgroups. In the first subgroup, the OP was modified by 1-degree increments without changing the maxillary midline. In the second subgroup, the OP was modified by the same increments, but the maxillary midline was altered to match the OP inclination. Participants were asked to rate the simulations on a 1-to-6 scale and a question survey. Ordinal logistic regression (OR) was used to analyze the ratings.
Tilt of the OP had the strongest negative effect on the ratings which was further amplified by the dental midline inclination (OR = 0.122). Midline modification alone did not affect the ratings (OR = 0.744). 3D simulations had a stronger positive effect on the ratings compared to 2D simulations. For dental students, the positive rating effect of 3D simulations was similar to dentists. For laypersons, the positive rating effect of 3D simulations compared to the 2D simulations decreased relative to dentists. The survey revealed that 45% of the dentists, 80% of the students, and 50% of the laypersons preferred the 3D simulation.
The type of dimensional representation affected the esthetic perception of all participants. 3D simulations obtained higher esthetic ratings for the same esthetic discrepancy than 2D simulations. However, all participants' ratings decreased with increased tilt of the OP and were further decreased with the inclination of the dental midline.
分析非专业人士、牙科学生和牙医在分析自身二维或三维临床模拟时对上颌牙中线和咬合平面（OP）差异的看法。
每个组有 20 名志愿者（N=60）。从每个参与者中获得口腔内和面部扫描以及照片。创建了两个模拟组：二维和三维组，它们又分为两个亚组。在第一个亚组中，通过 1 度增量修改 OP，而不改变上颌中线。在第二个亚组中，通过相同的增量修改 OP，但改变上颌中线以匹配 OP 倾斜度。要求参与者在 1 到 6 的范围内对模拟进行评分，并进行问卷调查。使用有序逻辑回归（OR）分析评分。
OP 的倾斜对评分的负面影响最大，而上颌中线的倾斜进一步放大了这种影响（OR=0.122）。单独的中线修改不会影响评分（OR=0.744）。与二维模拟相比，三维模拟对评分的积极影响更强。对于牙科学生，三维模拟的积极评分效果与牙医相似。对于非专业人士，与牙医相比，三维模拟的积极评分效果相对于二维模拟降低。调查显示，45%的牙医、80%的学生和 50%的非专业人士更喜欢三维模拟。
维度表示的类型影响了所有参与者的审美感知。与二维模拟相比，三维模拟在相同的美学差异下获得了更高的美学评分。然而，所有参与者的评分随着 OP 倾斜度的增加而降低，并且随着牙中线的倾斜度的增加而进一步降低。
