Angle Orthod. 2020 Jul 1;90(4):571-577. doi: 10.2319/052719-362.1.
To evaluate the esthetic perceptions of orthodontists and laypersons for facial profile changes after orthodontic treatment using Herbst or Forsus appliances.
Pre- and posttreatment facial profile contour images of 20 Class II patients treated with Herbst (group H; n = 10) and Forsus (group F; n = 10) appliances were analyzed by 30 orthodontists and 30 laypersons, who graded them from 1 (unattractive) to 10 (very attractive) using a visual analog scale. Two assessments were carried out with a 15 day-interval. In the first evaluation, 40 images were presented in a random sequence. In the second evaluation, initial and final facial profile images of each patient were randomly presented side by side. To compare groups in relation to treatment method, Mann-Whitney tests were used. To evaluate differences between time points, Wilcoxon tests were used.
In the first evaluation, there was a significant difference between initial and final images only for group H, for both laypersons (P = .017) and orthodontists (P = .037). There was also a significant difference between laypersons and orthodontists in their ratings of posttreatment Herbst appliance profiles (P = .028). There was no significant difference between initial and final facial profile images for group F and no significant differences between or within evaluator groups in their ratings of initial or final Forsus appliance profiles. In the second evaluation, there was a significant difference between appliance groups only for laypersons, who considered cases treated with the Herbst appliance more attractive than those treated with the Forsus (P = .031). Laypersons also considered Herbst profiles more attractive than did orthodontists (P = .047).
Class II malocclusion treatment using the Herbst appliance may produce a more esthetically improved facial profile silhouette compared with Forsus appliances. The magnitude of perceived changes may not be considered clinically relevant.
评估正畸医生和非专业人士对使用 Herbst 或 Forsus 矫治器治疗后面部侧貌变化的审美感知。
对 20 名安氏Ⅱ类错牙合患者进行 Herbst（H 组，n=10）和 Forsus（F 组，n=10）矫治的治疗前后的侧貌轮廓图像进行分析，由 30 名正畸医生和 30 名非专业人士使用视觉模拟评分法（从 1 分（不美观）到 10 分（非常美观））对其进行评分。两次评估间隔 15 天。在第一次评估中，以随机顺序呈现 40 张图像。在第二次评估中，以随机方式并排呈现每个患者的初始和最终侧貌图像。为了比较治疗方法，使用 Mann-Whitney 检验。为了评估时间点之间的差异，使用 Wilcoxon 检验。
在第一次评估中，仅在 H 组中，无论是非专业人士（P=0.017）还是正畸医生（P=0.037），初始和最终图像之间均存在显著差异。在正畸医生和非专业人士对 Herbst 矫治器治疗后侧貌轮廓的评分之间也存在显著差异（P=0.028）。F 组的初始和最终侧貌图像之间没有显著差异，且非专业人士和正畸医生对初始和最终 Forsus 矫治器侧貌轮廓的评分均无显著差异。在第二次评估中，仅在非专业人士中，两组之间存在显著差异，他们认为使用 Herbst 矫治器治疗的病例比使用 Forsus 矫治器治疗的病例更有吸引力（P=0.031）。非专业人士还认为 Herbst 侧貌比正畸医生更有吸引力（P=0.047）。
与 Forsus 矫治器相比，使用 Herbst 矫治器治疗安氏Ⅱ类错牙合可能会产生更美观的侧貌轮廓。感知变化的幅度可能不被认为具有临床意义。
