Author
Listed:
- Vo Truong Nhu Ngoc
(School of Odonto Stomatology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam
Co-first authors.)
- Dang-Khoa Tran
(Department of Anatomy, University of Medicine Pham Ngoc Thach, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
Co-first authors.)
- Truong Manh Dung
(School of Odonto Stomatology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam
Co-first authors.)
- Nguyen Viet Anh
(School of Odonto Stomatology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam
Co-first authors.)
- Vu Thi Nga
(Institute for Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Danang 550000, Vietnam)
- Le Quynh Anh
(School of Odonto Stomatology, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam
Sydney Dental School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, The University of Sydney, Science Rd, Camperdown NSW 2050, Australia)
- Nguyen Thi Thuy Hanh
(Institute for Preventive medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam)
- Nguyen Phuong Linh
(Ban Mai School, Ha Dong, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam)
- Hoang Ngoc Quynh
(Nottingham Trent University, 50 Shakespeare St, Nottingham NG1 4FQ, UK)
- Dinh Toi Chu
(Faculty of Biology, Hanoi National University of Education, Hanoi 100000, Vietnam)
Abstract
Aim : It is important to meet the aesthetic expectation regarding the smile concept of both dentists and non-professionals after treatment is complete. Therefore, the study aims to evaluate the effects of altered displays in incisors, gingival margin, and other smile-related-factors on dentists’ vs. non-professionals’ aesthetics perceptions. Materials and method : We altered the features of 42 digital smile photographs to generate the changed displays in incisors, gingival margin, and other smile-related-factors. Then, these altered photographs were presented to 51 dentists and 51 non-professionals, and each picture was rated by each participant with a visual analog scale ranging from 0 (very ugly) to 100 (very beautiful). Results : We found that the alterations in incisors, gingival margin, and other factors affected studied groups’ aesthetic perception of smile. The ugly smile threshold rated by both groups for crown length of maxillary central incisors was 2.0 mm. This threshold was 2.5 mm for dentists, with moving the gingival margin of maxillary lateral incisors to the incisal ridge. The ugly thresholds for other smile-related-factors were different between studied groups; for example, the ugly thresholds for gingival exposure levels were 3 and 4mm for dentists and non-professionals, respectively. Thus, our data indicate that altered displays in incisors, gingival margin, and other smile-related-factors affected perceptions of both studied groups on smile aesthetics, but dentists tended to feel more refined than non-professionals. Dentists and non-professionals had significantly different aesthetic perceptions of the alteration of the gingival exposure level. Conclusion : Both dentists and non-professionals’ perceptions should be fully considered during orthodontic and prosthodontic treatment to achieve optimum aesthetic results.
Suggested Citation
Vo Truong Nhu Ngoc & Dang-Khoa Tran & Truong Manh Dung & Nguyen Viet Anh & Vu Thi Nga & Le Quynh Anh & Nguyen Thi Thuy Hanh & Nguyen Phuong Linh & Hoang Ngoc Quynh & Dinh Toi Chu, 2020.
"Perceptions of Dentists and Non-Professionals on Some Dental Factors Affecting Smile Aesthetics: A Study from Vietnam,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-10, March.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:5:p:1638-:d:327982
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Hang-Nga Mai & Du-Hyeong Lee, 2020.
"The Effect of Perioral Scan and Artificial Skin Markers on the Accuracy of Virtual Dentofacial Integration: Stereophotogrammetry Versus Smartphone Three-Dimensional Face-Scanning,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-12, December.
- Hang-Nga Mai & Jaeil Kim & Youn-Hee Choi & Du-Hyeong Lee, 2020.
"Accuracy of Portable Face-Scanning Devices for Obtaining Three-Dimensional Face Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15, December.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:5:p:1638-:d:327982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.