INTRODUCTION: Esthetic analysis of dynamic functions such as spontaneous smiling is feasible by using digital videography and computer measurement for lip line height and tooth display. Because quantitative measurements are time-consuming, digital videography and semiquantitative (visual) estimation according to a standard categorization are more practical for regular diagnostics. Our objective in this study was to compare 2 semiquantitative methods with quantitative measurements for reliability and agreement. METHODS: The faces of 122 male participants were individually registered by using digital videography. Spontaneous and posed smiles were captured. On the records, maxillary lip line heights and tooth display were digitally measured on each tooth and also visually estimated according to 3-grade and 4-grade scales. Two raters were involved. An error analysis was performed. Reliability was established with kappa statistics. RESULTS: Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability values were high, with median kappa values from 0.79 to 0.88. Agreement of the 3-grade scale estimation with quantitative measurement showed higher median kappa values (0.76) than the 4-grade scale estimation (0.66). Differentiating high and gummy smile lines (4-grade scale) resulted in greater inaccuracies. The estimation of a high, average, or low smile line for each tooth showed high reliability close to quantitative measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Smile line analysis can be performed reliably with a 3-grade scale (visual) semiquantitative estimation. For a more comprehensive diagnosis, additional measuring is proposed, especially in patients with disproportional gingival display.
INTRODUCTION: Esthetic analysis of dynamic functions such as spontaneous smiling is feasible by using digital videography and computer measurement for lip line height and tooth display. Because quantitative measurements are time-consuming, digital videography and semiquantitative (visual) estimation according to a standard categorization are more practical for regular diagnostics. Our objective in this study was to compare 2 semiquantitative methods with quantitative measurements for reliability and agreement. METHODS: The faces of 122 male participants were individually registered by using digital videography. Spontaneous and posed smiles were captured. On the records, maxillary lip line heights and tooth display were digitally measured on each tooth and also visually estimated according to 3-grade and 4-grade scales. Two raters were involved. An error analysis was performed. Reliability was established with kappa statistics. RESULTS: Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability values were high, with median kappa values from 0.79 to 0.88. Agreement of the 3-grade scale estimation with quantitative measurement showed higher median kappa values (0.76) than the 4-grade scale estimation (0.66). Differentiating high and gummy smile lines (4-grade scale) resulted in greater inaccuracies. The estimation of a high, average, or low smile line for each tooth showed high reliability close to quantitative measurements. CONCLUSIONS:Smile line analysis can be performed reliably with a 3-grade scale (visual) semiquantitative estimation. For a more comprehensive diagnosis, additional measuring is proposed, especially in patients with disproportional gingival display.