Volpato Graziela Hernandes, de Almeida-Pedrin Renata Rodrigues, Oltramari Paula Vanessa Pedron, Freire Fernandes Thaís Maria, de Almeida Marcio Rodrigues, de Castro Ferreira Conti Ana Cláudia
Department of Orthodontics, University of North Paraná, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
Department of Orthodontics, University of North Paraná, Londrina, Paraná, Brazil.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020 Dec;158(6):840-848. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.10.027. Epub 2020 Oct 21.
This study evaluated the perception of facial esthetics of patients with different profiles as assessed by orthodontists, lay people, and patients.
The sample comprised 120 patients (81 females, 39 males; mean age, 26.3 years) selected from private practices at the onset of orthodontic treatment. The patients were divided into 3 groups of 40 according to the type of facial profile. The groups were composed of straight, concave, and convex profiles, on the basis of the facial convexity angle (G.Sn.Pog') measured on the initial cephalometric tracings. Patients analyzed only their frontal (smiling and at rest) and profile facial photographs and evaluated the pleasantness of these images on a 5-point Likert scale. A group of 30 orthodontists and 30 lay people also evaluated the patients' facial pleasantness, using the same scale. Factorial analysis of variance (convexity and sex) was used to evaluate the differences between the convexities, and analysis of variance mixed model (type of evaluator and sex) to compare the 3 categories of evaluators, using the aligned rank transform technique. The correlation between the convexity angle and facial pleasantness was assessed by the Spearman correlation coefficient.
Patients and lay people assigned higher pleasantness scores than orthodontists, with statistically significant differences for all evaluations, except for the frontal analysis of the convex group. The correlation coefficients regarding profile convexity and facial pleasantness were negative, indicating a tendency that more convex or concave facial profiles received lower pleasantness scores; however, this correlation was only significant in the evaluation of profile photographs by orthodontists.
Patients with different profiles were scored with acceptable faces by lay people and patients themselves. Orthodontists' perceptions were different; they attributed lower pleasantness scores. Discrepant profiles affect facial esthetics in the profile view when judged by orthodontists.
本研究评估了正畸医生、外行人及患者对不同面部轮廓患者面部美观度的认知。
样本包括120名患者(81名女性,39名男性;平均年龄26.3岁),这些患者选自正畸治疗开始时的私人诊所。根据面部轮廓类型,将患者分为3组,每组40人。根据初始头影测量描记图上测量的面部凸度角(G.Sn.Pog'),将这些组分为直面型、凹面型和凸面型。患者仅分析其正面(微笑和静止时)和侧面面部照片,并使用5点李克特量表评估这些图像的美观度。一组30名正畸医生和30名外行人也使用相同量表评估患者面部的美观度。使用方差分析(凸度和性别)评估凸度之间的差异,并使用方差分析混合模型(评估者类型和性别)通过对齐秩变换技术比较3类评估者。通过斯皮尔曼相关系数评估凸度角与面部美观度之间的相关性。
患者和外行人给出的美观度评分高于正畸医生,除凸面型组的正面分析外,所有评估均存在统计学显著差异。关于侧面凸度与面部美观度的相关系数为负,表明面部凸度越大或凹度越大,美观度得分越低;然而,这种相关性仅在正畸医生对侧面照片的评估中显著。
外行人及患者自身认为不同面部轮廓的患者面部可接受。正畸医生的认知不同;他们给出的美观度得分较低。正畸医生判断时,差异较大的面部轮廓会影响侧面的面部美观度。