Introduction: The vertical heights and the proportions are very important for balance of the face and attractiveness along with the good smile. Harmonious vertical proportions and the Antero-posterior relations contribute to aesthetics. Therefore it is necessary to determine the vertical facial height and the ratios in treatment planning of the patients. The aims and objectives of this study are to compare the vertical facial heights of patients considering the Lower Anterior Facial Height (LAFH), the Upper Anterior Facial Height (UAFH), Total Anterior Facial Height (TAFH) and Posterior Facial Height (PFH) among the sexes in Class I skeletal group obtained from cephalometric analysis. Materials & Method: The study material comprised of 52 patients (24 males and 28 females) and lateral cephalometric radiographs were traced with Skeletal Class I relationship. Cephalometric analysis was performed by using hand tracing. Independent t tests were used for comparisons. Result: The total anterior facial height (TAFH), lower anterior facial height (LAFH), upper anterior facial height (UAFH), total posterior facial height (TPFH) measurements showed no significant differences between both sexes in Skeletal Class I group but statistically significant difference in ratios of posterior facial height and total anterior facial height and also there was statistically significant differences in the ratio between upper facial height and the total anterior facial height (p value <0.05). Conclusion: This cephalometric analysis can be applied to determine the vertical height of occlusion which can be helpful in prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous patients.

Background: Evaluation of the upper and lower airway space should be an integral part of diagnosis and treatment planning to achieve the functional balance and stability of the result after orthodontic or orthognathic treatment. This study aimed to analyze the pharyngeal airway space in different skeletal malocclusion and facial forms. Methods: Study was carried out in lateral cephalometric radiographs of 210 patients. Data was collected from March 2021 to December 2021. Pharyngeal airway spaces were analyzed according to McNamara Analysis. Upper and lower pharyngeal airway in different skeletal malocclusion and facial form was determined. Data was analyzed in SPSS version 20. Independent samples-t test was applied for gender distribution and Pearson correlation test was applied for upper and lower pharyngeal space. Results: The mean value of upper pharyngeal airway width in Class I, II and III were 12.07 mm, 11.57 mm and 12.34 mm respectively and for Mesofacial, Dolichofacial and Brachyfacial facial form were 12.35 mm, 11.83 mm and 11.81 mm respectively. Similarly, the mean value for lower pharyngeal airway width in Class I, II and III were 9.51 mm, 9.13 mm and 10.03 mm respectively and for Mesofacial, Dolichofacial and Brachyfacial facial form were 9.62 mm, 9.34 mm and 9.61mm respectively. Male had higher value of mean lower pharyngeal width than female. Conclusions: There was no impact of sagittal skeletal malocclusion on the upper and lower airways width. Also, there was no impact of different vertical skeletal types or facial forms on the upper and lower airways width.

Background: Patient’s perception of own facial appearance is also an important contributing factor for treatment planning. Also, knowledge and attitude of patients to orthodontic treatment is becoming more important in orthodontics these days. The study aimed to assess self-perception, awareness and attitude towards orthodontic treatment among dental students and interns. Methods: Data was collected through cross-sectional survey conducted among the dental students and dental interns in KIST Medical College through online google form. Study duration was from August 2021 - October 2021. The data was entered in SPSS software 20. Frequency distribution was generated for all variables. Categorical variables were evaluated using Chi-square test. Results: About 96.7% of the participants believe that orthodontic treatment will improve facial appearance. 61.5% believe that orthodontic treatment is a lengthy and painful procedure. 44.5% does not think orthodontic treatment weakens the teeth. 50% of female believe that orthodontic treatment will give the promising result. Statistically significant difference was obtained with respect to preference of different types of braces among students of different years. 54.9% of the participants are satisfied with the arrangements of their teeth, 20.9% had avoid smiling and 22.5% felt lack of confidence because of the appearance of their teeth. Almost half of the participants (50.5%) think they should have orthodontic treatment and 76.2% readily agree to orthodontic treatment if suggested by the dentist. Conclusions: Dental students and interns had a good knowledge about orthodontic treatment and positive attitude towards it. Gender difference exists regarding the awareness of orthodontic treatment. Statistically significant difference was found in preference of different types of braces in students of different years and interns.

No abstract

No abstract