Association of facial sagittal and vertical characteristics with facial aesthetics in the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966

Krooks, Laura; Pirttiniemi, Pertti; Tolvanen, Mimmi; Kanavakis, Georgios; Lähdesmäki, Raija; Silvola, Anna‐Sofia

doi:10.1093/ejo/cjy062

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the literature, there is a preference for a straight profile that corresponds to a Class I skeletal pattern, 28 which reflects facial attractiveness. 29 Thus, the most likely explanation for our results is that the anteroposterior aspect of the face is considered an important factor in the evaluation of aesthetics, which justifies the impact related to convex (Class II pattern) and concave (Class III pattern) profiles. The results supported the importance of in-depth investigation at the item level of OHRQoL assessment scales.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…The literature has affirmed that women report greater oral health-related social and psychological impacts than men. 10 , 29 , 30 The main difference in the findings concerned the age range; the majority of studies that have observed greater impacts on women 10 , 29 , 30 evaluated adolescents; in our study, we evaluated young adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of facial profile on young adults’ oral health-related quality-of-life item levels: A hierarchical analysis

MARTINS

Santos

Carneiro

et al. 2021

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the impact of facial profile on young adults’ oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) item levels. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out with a population-based sample of 205 young adults, with a mean age of 23.1 years. The individuals answered questions about OHRQoL (OHIP-14) and self-esteem (Global Negative Self-Evaluation). The Dental Health Component (DHC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) was used to evaluate normative orthodontic treatment needs and define dental malocclusion clinically. Facial profile was analyzed using photographs and dichotomized into two levels: normal (straight) and altered facial profile (convex or concave). A calibrated researcher performed the clinical examination. Association between the independent variables and the outcome (OHRQoL) was established by hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis for each item level. Considering the variable of interest (facial profile), the psychological incapacity domain was the most affected item. Results: Individuals with changed facial profile had 2.47 (1.04-5.85) times higher chances of reporting impacts on psychological incapacity than those with a normal profile (p> 0.05). The association was modulated by dental malocclusion and self-esteem. Conclusions: The convex and concave facial profile showed a negative impact on the psychological aspects of young adults’ quality of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Impact of facial profile on young adults’ oral health-related quality-of-life item levels: A hierarchical analysis

MARTINS

Santos

Carneiro

et al. 2021

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies in the literature indicate that, in this stage, there are better orthopedic responses to correct posterior skeletal crossbite 32 , anterior open bite 33 and skeletal Class III malocclusion 34 , as well as to monitor spaces and diagnose impactions or ectopic teeth. Several randomized con- trolled trials investigating the treatment of Class II malocclusion during growth had similar results for both the two-stage interventions -first at about the age of seven years and then during the time of young permanent dentition -and the one-stage treatment during pubertal growth spurt 18,11,35 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Dental and skeletal Class II malocclusion carries a greater risk of dental trauma 10 , a more negative perception of facial 11 and dental 12 esthetics, a negative impact on quality of life and self-esteem 13 , a greater predisposition to periodontal diseases 14 and tooth wear 15,16 , and a reduction of oropharyngeal space and greater incidence of sleep disorders 17 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different approaches to the treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion during growth: Bionator versus extraoral appliance

Rédua

2020

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Class II malocclusion, which has a significant incidence in the population, may compromise facial esthetics and the smile, as well as the masticatory and respiratory functions. Often associated with skeletal abnormalities, it severely affects and compromises quality of life. An accurate diagnosis is fundamental to prepare a treatment plan to correct dental and skeletal anomalies. Objectives: This study discusses treatment alternatives to the correction of Class II division 1 and 2 malocclusion in growing patients, using a Bionator and an extraoral appliance.

show abstract

“…Contini et al [ 30 ] indicated that the facial balance is not only affected by orthodontic treatment, but also by facial growth. Krooks et al [ 31 ] performed esthetic evaluation of facial attractiveness. They found that facial sagittal dimensions affected more facial esthetics than the vertical dimensions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalized Orthodontics: From the Sagittal Position of Lower Incisors to the Facial Profile Esthetics

Derwich¹,

Minch²,

Mituś-Kenig

et al. 2021

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: One of the goals of orthodontic treatment is to obtain maximum facial harmony. The sagittal position of the lower incisors plays a significant role in the planning of orthodontic treatment. The aim of the study was to evaluate the relationship between the sagittal position of lower incisors and facial profile esthetics with reference to the skeletal vertical dimension. Methods: There were 200 patients included in the study. Patients were allocated into three groups, depending on the vertical growth pattern: normal-angle, low-angle, and high-angle cases. Tweed–Merrifield cephalometric analysis was used to assess the sagittal and vertical position of the mandible, as well as to assess the sagittal position of the lower incisors. Results: Z-angle and Frankfort mandibular incisor plane angle (FMIA) decreased significantly (p < 0.001) with the increase of the skeletal vertical dimension. Incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in low-angle patients compared to the high-angle ones. Z-angle appeared to be the most accurate parameter (area under curve, AUC = 0.957) describing patients with a convex profile. The cutoff value of Z-angle 68.0° was characterized by the sensitivity of 94.1% and the specificity of 84.3%. Conclusions: The sagittal position of the lower incisors significantly affects the facial profile convexity. The Z-angle is the parameter which most accurately describes the patients with a convex profile.

show abstract

Association of facial sagittal and vertical characteristics with facial aesthetics in the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966

Cited by 12 publications

References 34 publications

Impact of facial profile on young adults’ oral health-related quality-of-life item levels: A hierarchical analysis

Impact of facial profile on young adults’ oral health-related quality-of-life item levels: A hierarchical analysis

Different approaches to the treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion during growth: Bionator versus extraoral appliance

Personalized Orthodontics: From the Sagittal Position of Lower Incisors to the Facial Profile Esthetics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About