Esthetic perception of the buccal corridor in different facial types by laypersons of different ages

: The focus of this study was to test the hypothesis that the amount of buccal corridor associated with dolicofacial, mesofacial and brachyfacial facial patterns has no influence on smile evaluations by laypersons of different age groups. A photograph was constructed of a woman displaying a broad sm...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bioscience journal 2015-07, Vol.31 (4), p.1283-1290
Hauptverfasser: Lacerda-Santos, Rogério, Pereira, Tiago Batista, Pithon, Matheus Melo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:: The focus of this study was to test the hypothesis that the amount of buccal corridor associated with dolicofacial, mesofacial and brachyfacial facial patterns has no influence on smile evaluations by laypersons of different age groups. A photograph was constructed of a woman displaying a broad smile. Buccal corridors were modified digitally in increments of 5% and 10%, displaying from 0% to 30% buccal corridor compared with the inner commissural width. Using a visual analog scale(VAS), 150 laypersons divided into 3 groups(n=50) of age-ranges from 15-19, 35-44 and 65-74 years of age rated the attractiveness of five smiles with altered buccal corridors. Differences in the median esthetic scores were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (P0.05). There was significant difference between the groups from 15-19 and 65-74 years of age in evaluating the attractiveness of the smile with the size of the buccal corridor at 20% and 30% for the short(P=0.045, and P=0.035) and long (P=0.029, and P=0.038) facial types, respectively. The hypothesis was rejected. Laypersons over the age of 65 years attributed higher scores. Irrespective of age, laypersons preferred broader smiles with a smaller buccal corridor, with 15% being the limit between the most and least attractive smile.
ISSN:1981-3163
1981-3163
DOI:10.14393/BJ-v31n4a2015-28654