Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights?
Introduction The aims of the study were to determine how a panel of orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons rated the esthetic appeal of dentitions after orthodontic space closure by canine substitution compared with space opening and replacement of missing maxillary lateral incisors by implant-born...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics 2016-09, Vol.150 (3), p.416-424 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 424 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 416 |
| container_title | American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics |
| container_volume | 150 |
| creator | Schneider, Ute Moser, Lorenz Fornasetti, Marzia Piattella, Michele Siciliani, Giuseppe |
| description | Introduction The aims of the study were to determine how a panel of orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons rated the esthetic appeal of dentitions after orthodontic space closure by canine substitution compared with space opening and replacement of missing maxillary lateral incisors by implant-borne crowns and to compare the outcome with the results of a study in the United States in 2005. Methods A series of 9 posttreatment intraoral frontal photographs was presented to 87 orthodontists, 100 general dentists, and 100 laypersons. The photographs represented dentitions with either single-tooth implants or canine substitutions for missing maxillary lateral incisors and dentitions with no missing teeth. Each photograph was rated independently by assigning a number between 1 (best) and 5 (worst) for a series of 7 bipolar adjectives. Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests were performed to assess differences in intragroup and intergroup preferences for the various treatment options. Subsequently, the mean scores were compared with the mean scores in the study from 2005. Results Highly significant improvements ( P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.025 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816631805</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0889540616301937</els_id><sourcerecordid>1816631805</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-fa6f472ad51800d695cb3e5afff9c70270d8419d52a3e73054796de7da9f12873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFks1u1DAQxyMEokvhCZCQj1yy2Ekcx0iAqqotSJU4AGfL60x2HRx78Thb9j14YJxu4cAFaWTL8u8_30XxktE1o6x9M671GPqwrvJjTats_FGxYlSKshW8elysaNfJkje0PSueIY6UUtlU9GlxVgnecdHKVfHrCtMOkjUEDtrNOtngSRiInfZO-4TkgMRobz0QnDeYbJrvEevJPsOwIHc27YgJfgveJu3ckUwW0fotmfRP65yOR-J0gqhd1hmLIeJbchGB5ND51P5IPNzlP7TbXcIPz4sng3YILx7u8-Lb9dXXy4_l7eebT5cXt6VpuEzloNuhEZXuOeso7VvJzaYGrodhkEbQStC-a5jseaVrEDXljZBtD6LXcmBVJ-rz4vXJ7z6GHzNgUjlxAzljD2FGxTrWtnV2zjNan1ATA2KEQe2jnXJlilG1jEON6n4cahmHolW2RfXqIcC8maD_q_nT_wy8OwGQyzxYiApNbqqB3kYwSfXB_ifA-3_0xllvjXbf4Qg4hjn63EHFFGaB-rJsxLIQrK0pk7WofwMYlbVO</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1816631805</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Schneider, Ute ; Moser, Lorenz ; Fornasetti, Marzia ; Piattella, Michele ; Siciliani, Giuseppe</creator><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Ute ; Moser, Lorenz ; Fornasetti, Marzia ; Piattella, Michele ; Siciliani, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction The aims of the study were to determine how a panel of orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons rated the esthetic appeal of dentitions after orthodontic space closure by canine substitution compared with space opening and replacement of missing maxillary lateral incisors by implant-borne crowns and to compare the outcome with the results of a study in the United States in 2005. Methods A series of 9 posttreatment intraoral frontal photographs was presented to 87 orthodontists, 100 general dentists, and 100 laypersons. The photographs represented dentitions with either single-tooth implants or canine substitutions for missing maxillary lateral incisors and dentitions with no missing teeth. Each photograph was rated independently by assigning a number between 1 (best) and 5 (worst) for a series of 7 bipolar adjectives. Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests were performed to assess differences in intragroup and intergroup preferences for the various treatment options. Subsequently, the mean scores were compared with the mean scores in the study from 2005. Results Highly significant improvements ( P <0.0001) in the esthetic outcome for implants were found in all respondent groups when compared with the study from 2005. To date, orthodontists and dentists rank implants and canine substitution as equally pleasing, but laypersons prefer space closure. Conclusions Perceptions of dental esthetics can vary between dental professionals and laypersons. Investigating each patient's esthetic expectations is thus important, but in the patient's best interest, esthetic and functional aspects should be carefully weighed during comprehensive treatment planning.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0889-5406</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6752</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.025</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27585769</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Anodontia - therapy ; Attitude of Health Personnel ; Crowns ; Cuspid ; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth - ethics ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported ; Dentistry ; Esthetics, Dental ; Female ; Humans ; Incisor - abnormalities ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orthodontic Space Closure ; Photography ; Tooth Movement Techniques</subject><ispartof>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2016-09, Vol.150 (3), p.416-424</ispartof><rights>American Association of Orthodontists</rights><rights>2016 American Association of Orthodontists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-fa6f472ad51800d695cb3e5afff9c70270d8419d52a3e73054796de7da9f12873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-fa6f472ad51800d695cb3e5afff9c70270d8419d52a3e73054796de7da9f12873</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0460-6873</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.025$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27585769$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Ute</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moser, Lorenz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fornasetti, Marzia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Piattella, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siciliani, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><title>Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights?</title><title>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</title><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><description>Introduction The aims of the study were to determine how a panel of orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons rated the esthetic appeal of dentitions after orthodontic space closure by canine substitution compared with space opening and replacement of missing maxillary lateral incisors by implant-borne crowns and to compare the outcome with the results of a study in the United States in 2005. Methods A series of 9 posttreatment intraoral frontal photographs was presented to 87 orthodontists, 100 general dentists, and 100 laypersons. The photographs represented dentitions with either single-tooth implants or canine substitutions for missing maxillary lateral incisors and dentitions with no missing teeth. Each photograph was rated independently by assigning a number between 1 (best) and 5 (worst) for a series of 7 bipolar adjectives. Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests were performed to assess differences in intragroup and intergroup preferences for the various treatment options. Subsequently, the mean scores were compared with the mean scores in the study from 2005. Results Highly significant improvements ( P <0.0001) in the esthetic outcome for implants were found in all respondent groups when compared with the study from 2005. To date, orthodontists and dentists rank implants and canine substitution as equally pleasing, but laypersons prefer space closure. Conclusions Perceptions of dental esthetics can vary between dental professionals and laypersons. Investigating each patient's esthetic expectations is thus important, but in the patient's best interest, esthetic and functional aspects should be carefully weighed during comprehensive treatment planning.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anodontia - therapy</subject><subject>Attitude of Health Personnel</subject><subject>Crowns</subject><subject>Cuspid</subject><subject>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth - ethics</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Esthetics, Dental</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incisor - abnormalities</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthodontic Space Closure</subject><subject>Photography</subject><subject>Tooth Movement Techniques</subject><issn>0889-5406</issn><issn>1097-6752</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFks1u1DAQxyMEokvhCZCQj1yy2Ekcx0iAqqotSJU4AGfL60x2HRx78Thb9j14YJxu4cAFaWTL8u8_30XxktE1o6x9M671GPqwrvJjTats_FGxYlSKshW8elysaNfJkje0PSueIY6UUtlU9GlxVgnecdHKVfHrCtMOkjUEDtrNOtngSRiInfZO-4TkgMRobz0QnDeYbJrvEevJPsOwIHc27YgJfgveJu3ckUwW0fotmfRP65yOR-J0gqhd1hmLIeJbchGB5ND51P5IPNzlP7TbXcIPz4sng3YILx7u8-Lb9dXXy4_l7eebT5cXt6VpuEzloNuhEZXuOeso7VvJzaYGrodhkEbQStC-a5jseaVrEDXljZBtD6LXcmBVJ-rz4vXJ7z6GHzNgUjlxAzljD2FGxTrWtnV2zjNan1ATA2KEQe2jnXJlilG1jEON6n4cahmHolW2RfXqIcC8maD_q_nT_wy8OwGQyzxYiApNbqqB3kYwSfXB_ifA-3_0xllvjXbf4Qg4hjn63EHFFGaB-rJsxLIQrK0pk7WofwMYlbVO</recordid><startdate>20160901</startdate><enddate>20160901</enddate><creator>Schneider, Ute</creator><creator>Moser, Lorenz</creator><creator>Fornasetti, Marzia</creator><creator>Piattella, Michele</creator><creator>Siciliani, Giuseppe</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0460-6873</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160901</creationdate><title>Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights?</title><author>Schneider, Ute ; Moser, Lorenz ; Fornasetti, Marzia ; Piattella, Michele ; Siciliani, Giuseppe</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-fa6f472ad51800d695cb3e5afff9c70270d8419d52a3e73054796de7da9f12873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anodontia - therapy</topic><topic>Attitude of Health Personnel</topic><topic>Crowns</topic><topic>Cuspid</topic><topic>Dental Implants, Single-Tooth - ethics</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Esthetics, Dental</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incisor - abnormalities</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthodontic Space Closure</topic><topic>Photography</topic><topic>Tooth Movement Techniques</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Ute</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moser, Lorenz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fornasetti, Marzia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Piattella, Michele</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siciliani, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schneider, Ute</au><au>Moser, Lorenz</au><au>Fornasetti, Marzia</au><au>Piattella, Michele</au><au>Siciliani, Giuseppe</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights?</atitle><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><date>2016-09-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>150</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>416</spage><epage>424</epage><pages>416-424</pages><issn>0889-5406</issn><eissn>1097-6752</eissn><abstract>Introduction The aims of the study were to determine how a panel of orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons rated the esthetic appeal of dentitions after orthodontic space closure by canine substitution compared with space opening and replacement of missing maxillary lateral incisors by implant-borne crowns and to compare the outcome with the results of a study in the United States in 2005. Methods A series of 9 posttreatment intraoral frontal photographs was presented to 87 orthodontists, 100 general dentists, and 100 laypersons. The photographs represented dentitions with either single-tooth implants or canine substitutions for missing maxillary lateral incisors and dentitions with no missing teeth. Each photograph was rated independently by assigning a number between 1 (best) and 5 (worst) for a series of 7 bipolar adjectives. Two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests were performed to assess differences in intragroup and intergroup preferences for the various treatment options. Subsequently, the mean scores were compared with the mean scores in the study from 2005. Results Highly significant improvements ( P <0.0001) in the esthetic outcome for implants were found in all respondent groups when compared with the study from 2005. To date, orthodontists and dentists rank implants and canine substitution as equally pleasing, but laypersons prefer space closure. Conclusions Perceptions of dental esthetics can vary between dental professionals and laypersons. Investigating each patient's esthetic expectations is thus important, but in the patient's best interest, esthetic and functional aspects should be carefully weighed during comprehensive treatment planning.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>27585769</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.025</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0460-6873</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0889-5406 |
| ispartof | American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2016-09, Vol.150 (3), p.416-424 |
| issn | 0889-5406 1097-6752 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1816631805 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Adult Anodontia - therapy Attitude of Health Personnel Crowns Cuspid Dental Implants, Single-Tooth - ethics Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported Dentistry Esthetics, Dental Female Humans Incisor - abnormalities Male Middle Aged Orthodontic Space Closure Photography Tooth Movement Techniques |
| title | Esthetic evaluation of implants vs canine substitution in patients with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors: Are there any new insights? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T14%3A22%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Esthetic%20evaluation%20of%20implants%20vs%20canine%20substitution%20in%20patients%20with%20congenitally%20missing%20maxillary%20lateral%20incisors:%20Are%20there%20any%20new%20insights?&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20orthodontics%20and%20dentofacial%20orthopedics&rft.au=Schneider,%20Ute&rft.date=2016-09-01&rft.volume=150&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=416&rft.epage=424&rft.pages=416-424&rft.issn=0889-5406&rft.eissn=1097-6752&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.025&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1816631805%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1816631805&rft_id=info:pmid/27585769&rft_els_id=S0889540616301937&rfr_iscdi=true |