The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 20 , ISSUE 3 ( March, 2019 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Perception of Facial Esthetics by Laypersons, Dental Assistants, General Dental Practitioners and Dental Specialists

Alhammadi MS

Keywords : Dental professionals, Facial esthetics, Layperson, Perception

Citation Information : MS A. Perception of Facial Esthetics by Laypersons, Dental Assistants, General Dental Practitioners and Dental Specialists. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20 (3):304-310.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2514

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 00-03-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2019; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim: This study sought to assess perception of facial esthetics by laypersons and dental professionals. Materials and methods: Three standard photographs were digitally manipulated involving three facial characteristics; facial symmetry, facial profile and facial vertical proportions. A sample of 465 [142 laypersons (LP), 97 dental assistants (DA), 152 general dental practitioners (GDP) and 74 dental specialists (DS)] evaluated the standard and the manipulated images on a visual analogue scale ranging from 1 (the less pleasant image) to 5 (the standard image). The responses were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests. A p value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: The overall score was 61.29 ± 16.19% with no statistical difference by gender. GDP showed significantly higher perception score than LP, DA and DS did. Regarding the individual facial esthetic components, females showed significantly better perception for “facial profile”, while males showed significantly better perception for “facial symmetry” and “facial vertical proportions”. Facial symmetry and facial vertical proportions were perceived differently with the higher perception score for the GDP and the lowest perception scores were for LP. Conclusion: Remarkable variations do exist with regard to facial esthetic perception by LP, DA, GDP and DS, with GDP showed more favorable perception. Clinical significance: Perception of facial esthetics by laypersons and dental practitioners with a different level of dental education and clinical experience gives an indication about the difference between the patients’ desire and the practitioners’ perception of such esthetic demands.


PDF Share
  1. Van der Geld P, Oosterveld P, Van Heck G, et al. Smile attractiveness. Self-perception and influence on personality. Angle Orthod 2007;77:759-765.
  2. Broer PN, Juran S, Liu YJ, et al. The impact of geographic, ethnic, and demographic dynamics on the perception of beauty. J Craniofac Surg 2014;25:e157-161.
  3. de Deus Tupinambá Rodrigues C, et al. The perception of smile attractiveness: variations from esthetic norms, photographic framing and order of presentation. The Angle Orthod 2009;79:634-639.
  4. Anderson C, John OP, Keltner D, et al. Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. J Pers Soc Psychol 2001;81:116-132.
  5. Flores-Mir C, Silva E, Barriga MI, et al. Lay person's perception of smile aesthetics in dental and facial views. J Orthod 2004;31:204-209; discussion 201.
  6. Yin L, Jiang M, Chen W, et al. Differences in facial profile and dental esthetic perceptions between young adults and orthodontists. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;145: 750-756.
  7. Soni J, Shyagali T, Kulkarni N, et al. Evaluation of influence of altered lower vertical proportions in the perception of facial attractiveness. Int J Orthod Rehabil 2016;7:124.
  8. Ioi H, Yasutomi H, Nakata S, et al. Effect of lower facial vertical proportion on facial attractiveness in Japanese. Orthod Waves 2006;65:161-165.
  9. Silva BP, Jimenez-Castellanos E, Martinez-de-Fuentes R, et al. Laypersons’ perception of facial and dental asymmetries. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2013;33:e162-171.
  10. McAvinchey G, Maxim F, Nix B, et al. The perception of facial asymmetry using 3-dimensional simulated images. Angle Orthod 2014;84:957-965.
  11. Barbosa PBC, de Souza Matos F, Cericato GO, Rosário HD, et al. Perception of laypersons and dentists regarding esthetic facial changes: a systematic review. Bioscience J 2016;32.
  12. Fabré M, Mossaz C, Christou P, et al. Orthodontists’ and laypersons’ aesthetic assessment of Class III subjects referred for orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod 2009;31:443-448.
  13. Torsello F, Graci M, Grande NM, et al. Relationships between facial features in the perception of profile attractiveness. Prog Orthod 2010;11:92-97.
  14. Silva NCFd, Aquino ÉRBd, Mello KCFR, et al. Orthodontists’ and laypersons’ perception of mandibular asymmetries. Dental Press J Orthod 2011;16:38. e31-38. e38.
  15. Alhaija ESA, Al-Shamsi NO, Al-Khateeb S. Perceptions of Jordanian laypersons and dental professionals to altered smile aesthetics. Eur J Orthod 2011;33:450-456.
  16. Abu Arqoub SH, Al-Khateeb SN. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. Eur J Orthod 2010;33:103-111.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.