No abstract

No abstract

The aim of this study was to assess and evaluate the awareness and knowledge of smile arc and analysis among orthodontists and non-orthodontists by means of conducting a knowledge, attitude and practices survey. A closed questionnaire of 17 questions was prepared in consultation with experts involved in the training of dentists. Based on a pilot study a response count of 130 was determined to achieve a power of 80. The questionnaire was shred through professional chat forums. A reminder post was shared two weeks after the initial post. The survey was closed four weeks after the reminder post and 145 responses were obtained. Most respondents were non-orthodontists and were young practitioners with experience of less than 5 years. Descriptive statistics showed that most respondents are aware of smile analysis and smile arc but most respondents do not use it in practice for diagnosis and treatment planning. Independent t-test showed that orthodontists are more aware of smile arc and smile analysis and use it more often in clinical practice when compared to non-orthodontists. Most participants are aware of the parameters for to be evaluated for smile analysis and smile arc.

It is of interest to establish the cephalometric correlation of angular data between frankfort horizontal and the sella-nasion line in different sagittal skeletal bases. Beta angle was used to divide the sample based on their sagittal skeletal base relationship. The FH-SN angle was measured for each group. The data were tabulated into IBM SPSS software. Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk test was done to test the normal distribution of the data. One-way ANOVA analysis was done to test the difference of the FH-SN angle among the groups. Independent samples t-Test was done to test for gender dimorphism. The mean FH-SN angle of the sample was 6.33°3.35°. The results of the One-Way ANOVA and independent samples t-Test were insignificant. Results show that is no statistically significant difference in FHSN angle between skeletal class I, II and III.The mean FH-SN angle of the sample was 6.33°3.35°. The distribution of the data was normal. The results of the One-Way ANOVA and Independent samples t-Test were insignificant. There was no statistically significant difference in FH-SN angle between skeletal class I, II and III.

No abstract