Literature DB >> 12940556

Perception of facial esthetics: a comparison of similar class II cases treated with attempted growth modification or later orthognathic surgery.

Tracey L Shell1, Michael G Woods.   

Abstract

In recent years, there has been considerable interest in the esthetic outcomes of various types of Class II treatment. In this study, it was the authors' intent to determine the esthetic outcomes for 60 Class II division 1 patients: 28 patients treated during the active growth phase with an activator and fixed appliances and 32 patients treated at the completion of growth with fixed appliances and by orthognathic surgery. Using a visual analogue scale, a mixed panel of 14 judges scored the pre- and posttreatment attractiveness of these patients from frontal and lateral facial photographs. Statistical analysis by two-sample t-tests indicated that, on average, esthetic scores improved with treatment, regardless of the treatment modality. There was, however, considerable individual variation in the degree of improvement, even to the point that there was a decline in esthetics for some patients. Despite somewhat different modes of treatment, it was found that neither the average pre- and posttreatment esthetic scores nor the change in esthetic score with treatment was significantly different for the two groups. Although clinical planning decisions should still be made on an individual basis, the findings of this study suggest that the perceived esthetic outcome in many Class II division 1 patients may well be just as favorable, regardless of whether they are managed early during the growth phase or later, at the completion of growth by orthognathic surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12940556     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2003)073<0365:POFEAC>2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  6 in total

1.  Soft tissue effects of three different Class II/1-camouflage treatment strategies.

Authors:  Ezgi Atik; Bengisu Akarsu-Guven; Ilken Kocadereli
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Effect of orthognathic surgery on profile esthetics in Class II:1 malocclusions.

Authors:  Katharina Klaus; Christian Heumann; Sabine Ruf
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  Evaluation of Patients' Satisfaction after Class III Orthognathic Surgery.

Authors:  Osvaldo Magro-Filho; Marcelo Coelho Goiato; Derly Tescaro Narcizo Oliveira; Lidia Pimenta Martins; Marcio Salazar; Rodrigo Antonio De Medeiros; Daniela Micheline Dos Santos
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-10-01

4.  Class II treatment in adults: comparing camouflage orthodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthognathic surgery--a cephalometric study to evaluate various therapeutic effects.

Authors:  Gero Kinzinger; Linda Frye; Peter Diedrich
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 1.938

5.  Identification of Maxillofacial Problems in Extraoral Photographs by Panel Members: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Yağmur Kılıçaslan; Türkan Sezen Erhamza; Ferabi Erhan Özdiler
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2019-03-01

6.  Morphological characteristics influencing the orthodontic extraction strategies for Angle's class II division 1 malocclusions.

Authors:  Yongwen Guo; Xianglong Han; Hui Xu; Dongqing Ai; Huan Zeng; Ding Bai
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-07-09       Impact factor: 2.750

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.