Abdullah Alper Öz1, Berat Serdar Akdeniz2, Erman Canlı3, Samet Çelik3. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Ondokuz Mayıs University School of Dentistry, Samsun, Turkey. 2. Department of Orthodontics, Kırıkkkale University School of Dentistry, Kırıkkale, Turkey. 3. Private practice, Samsun, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptable values of female and male smile attractiveness based on different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths, as judged by dental professionals and laypersons. METHODS: The frontal smile photographs of a male and female model were modified to create seven different smile photographs of the same individual with different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths. Overall, 249 evaluators in four groups (Group 1=orthodontists, Group 2=prosthodontists, Group 3=oral surgeons, and Group 4=laypersons) evaluated 28 images of different smiles with a visual analogue scale. Significant statistical differences were found among the evaluator's scores (p<0.05). RESULTS: For female smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 12% and 0% buccal corridor width. For male smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 4%, 0%, 12%, and 16% buccal corridor width for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The highest scores were obtained for +2 mm and -3 mm of gingival display for female smiles. CONCLUSION: The amount of gingival display, the buccal corridor width, and the knowledge in the field affects the perceptions of smile attractiveness. Thus, 3 mm of gingival display and buccal corridor width larger than 16% should be avoided for esthetic reasons during dental treatment.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the acceptable values of female and male smile attractiveness based on different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths, as judged by dental professionals and laypersons. METHODS: The frontal smile photographs of a male and female model were modified to create seven different smile photographs of the same individual with different amounts of gingival display and buccal corridor widths. Overall, 249 evaluators in four groups (Group 1=orthodontists, Group 2=prosthodontists, Group 3=oral surgeons, and Group 4=laypersons) evaluated 28 images of different smiles with a visual analogue scale. Significant statistical differences were found among the evaluator's scores (p<0.05). RESULTS: For female smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 12% and 0% buccal corridor width. For male smiles, the highest scores were obtained for 4%, 0%, 12%, and 16% buccal corridor width for Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The highest scores were obtained for +2 mm and -3 mm of gingival display for female smiles. CONCLUSION: The amount of gingival display, the buccal corridor width, and the knowledge in the field affects the perceptions of smile attractiveness. Thus, 3 mm of gingival display and buccal corridor width larger than 16% should be avoided for esthetic reasons during dental treatment.