Esthetic perception of facial profile after treatment with the Thurow appliance

Pithon, Matheus Melo; Santos, Rogério Lacerda dos; Oliveira, Danillo Lyrio de; Alves, Janaína Viana; Britto, Joyce Pereira; Souza, Eduardo da Silva; Alves, Leandro Pereira; Barbosa, George; Coqueiro, Raildo da Silva; Santos, Alex Ferreira dos

doi:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2015.vol29.0043

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 23 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…14,17,18 However, aspects that influence examiners' perceptions of facial attractiveness may be eliminated by using profile silhouettes. 15,19,20,21,22 The concept that orthodontic treatment by extraction of premolars damages facial profile esthetics often keeps the orthodontist back from choosing this option in devising the treatment planning. In this respect, over the years, orthodontists have been investigating the relationship between facial profile esthetics and orthodontic treatment by tooth extraction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sample calculation of the number of patients required for each group was based on a study by Pithon et al, 15 in which the greatest standard deviation of scores assigned was 1.25. Thus, considering a significance level of 5% and power of 80%, with a minimum difference of 1.0 between the two groups, a minimum sample of 26 patients was calculated for each group.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Rocha

Casteluci

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective study evaluated facial profile pleasantness determined by two protocols of Class II treatment. The sample comprised facial profile silhouettes obtained retrospectively from the pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) cephalograms of 60 patients (42 males and 18 females) divided into two groups. One group of 30 patients (mean age of 12.84 years) was treated with the extraction of maxillary first premolars (mean treatment time of 2.7 years), and the other group of 30 patients (mean age of 12.81 years) was treated with a mandibular advancement appliance (Forsus) (mean treatment time of 2.49 years). The facial profile silhouettes (T1 and T2) were randomly distributed in an album containing one patient per sheet. The examiners consisted of 60 orthodontists and 60 lay individuals, who analyzed the profiles in regard to facial pleasantness, using the Likert scale. A comparison between stages T1 and T2 of the two treatment protocols and between the examiners was performed by mixed-design analysis of variance at a significance level of 5%. The results demonstrated a significant difference between T1 and T2 (greater scores for T2 compared to T1), and between lay individuals and orthodontists (orthodontists assigned higher scores), but with no significant difference between the treatment protocols. Both protocols produced positive effects on the facial profile esthetics, from the standpoint of lay individuals and orthodontists.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Rocha

Casteluci

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are various options for the treatment of the Class II malocclusion, making it one of the most studied topics in contemporary orthodontics. The choice of an appropriate treatment must take certain factors into consideration, such as the patient's age and the extent of the esthetic and occlusal impairment 5,6 . In patients with severe Class II malocclusion, the main complaint is usually related to an increase in the overjet.…”

Section: The Esthetic Profile Preferences Of Class II Malocclusion Pamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Thurow Appliance is an excellent alternative for the treatment of Class II patients. Forces between 350g and 500g are considered sufficient to induce orthopedic changes in the jaw by restricting maxillary vertical and horizontal growth, which can improve the patients' facial profile [5][6][7][8][9] .…”

Section: The Esthetic Profile Preferences Of Class II Malocclusion Pamentioning

confidence: 99%

The esthetic profile preferences of Class II malocclusion patients treated with extraction or non-extraction

Ladewig

Trecenti²,

Pedrin

et al. 2018

J. Health Scie.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The treatment of Class II can have a positive or a negative impact on the facial profile aesthetic. The present study aims to evaluate the impact of two methods of orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion on the facial profile aesthetics. The facial profiles of 46 patients with Class II malocclusion were outlined by radiography before and after treatment; 23 of the patients were treated by the extraction of two maxillary first premolars (EXT group), and the other 23, with the Thurow Appliance (TA group), followed by braces. The profile silhouettes were filled in using the Corel Draw program. An album containing the patient’s silhouettes of both groups was created randomly, with two profiles of a patient per page. The preferences of 30 orthodontists, 30 dentists, and 30 laypersons in relation to the profile were recorded along with their perceived differences between the pre-treatment and post-treatment profiles, according to the visual analog scale. All groups of evaluators preferred the post-treatment profile more frequently. There were statistically significant differences in the evaluators’ preferences only between the orthodontists’ and the laypersons’ groups. None of the evaluators’ groups indicated substantial differences between the pre-treatment and post-treatment profiles. It may be concluded that both Class II treatment protocols, i.e., the double-extraction of the first premolars and the use of TA, improved the patients’ facial profile aesthetics.Keywords: Face. Malocclusion, Angle Class II. Tooth Extraction.Resumo As modalidades de tratamentos da Classe II tem um impacto sobre a estética da face que pode ser positivo ou negativo. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o impacto da estética do perfil facial decorrente de dois tipos de tratamento para a Classe II. Foram traçados os perfis faciais das telerradiografias pré e pós-tratamento de 46 pacientes Classe II, sendo 23 de um grupo tratado com extração de dois primeiros pré-molares superiores e 23 de um grupo tratado com AEB Conjugado seguido de aparelho fixo, e estes traçados foram preenchidos com o programa Corel Draw. Foi montado um álbum com as silhuetas dos pacientes (AEB e EXO) de forma aleatória, sendo dois perfis em cada folha do mesmo paciente. Foi pedido para 30 ortodontistas, 30 cirurgiões-dentistas e 30 leigos para verificarem a sua preferência em relação ao perfil e a quantidade de diferença entre os perfis pré e pós-tratamento, de acordo com a escala analógica visual. Os 3 grupos de avaliadores preferiram o perfil pós-tratamento com maior frequência. Houve diferenças estatisticamente significantes somente entre os grupos de avaliadores ortodontistas e leigos; os 3 grupos de avaliadores indicaram que os perfis pré e pós-tratamento, não diferiram substancialmente. Pode-se concluir que o tratamento da Classe II, com extração de dois primeiros pré-molares, e com o uso do aparelho AEB Conjugado produziu um impacto positivo na estética do perfil.Palavras-chave: Face. Má Oclusão de Angle Classe II. Extração Dentária.

show abstract

“…Situa-se mais frequentemente entre zero e dois graus, salvo quando há danos em região cutaneomucosa ou danos ósseos associados a lesões dentárias (Bouchardet;. (Pithon et al, 2015).…”

Section: Revisão Da Literaturaunclassified

Validação do instrumento de Análise da Impressão e do Impacto do Prejuízo Estético (AIPE) para uso em Odontologia Legal

Fernandes¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A minha mãe Astrid e ao meu pai do coração Roberto, por terem feito tudo que foi possível para me acolher quando estive em São Paulo com carinho, paciência e dedicação. Agradeço pelas caronas, cafés da manhã e outras regalias proporcionadas dando um suporte fundamental para essa conquista.Aos meus queridos sogros Célia e Sérgio, e a super cunhada Luciana por me darem segurança, apoio constante e incentivo nas minhas atividades acadêmicas. In the last decades, the elevated number of victims of traffic accidents, urban violence, sports-related trauma, occupational injuries, and professional-related errors increased the concern with the expert aspect, whether in the criminal or civil context, because of the sequelae associated with these injuries and trauma, also to the maxillofacial region. In this sense, this study aimed to translate into Brazilian Portuguese and culturally adapt for use in Brazil the Spanish instrument called Analysis of Aesthetic Damage Impression and Impact (AIPE) proposed by CoboPlana (2010), and to validate the instrument among dentists working in forensic dentistry. After translation and cultural adaptation, fake scars (moulage) were placed on the maxillofacial region of two models, a male and a female. Dentists specializing in forensic dentistry were selected to make the assessments. These students used the instrument, which consists of four tables, on a sequence of ten randomized images, showing models with and without facial scars. The intraclass correlation coefficient measured observer reliability to verify instrument validity. In general the method was satisfactory for one scar and excellent for two scars of the three repeated scars. Regarding intertester error, descriptive analysis of the results showed a variation coefficient of the scores of 40.12% when all the coefficients were considered, demonstrating that the scores were relatively homogeneous. The four tables translated into Brazilian Portuguese and culturally adapted for Brazil have the potential to increase the objectivity of aesthetic damage assessment.

show abstract

Esthetic perception of facial profile after treatment with the Thurow appliance

Cited by 13 publications

References 23 publications

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

The esthetic profile preferences of Class II malocclusion patients treated with extraction or non-extraction

Validação do instrumento de Análise da Impressão e do Impacto do Prejuízo Estético (AIPE) para uso em Odontologia Legal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About