Perception of maxillary anterior esthetics by dental professionals and lay people and topographical tooth-gingiva interface.
10.5051/jkape.2006.36.4.817
- Author:
Ki Yeon AN
1
;
Ju Youn LEE
;
Sung Jo KIM
;
Jeom Il CHOI
Author Information
1. Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Pusan National University, Korea. jrapa@pusan.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
gingival esthetic line;
gingival topography;
tooth alignment
- MeSH:
Crowns;
Decision Making;
Esthetics*;
Esthetics, Dental;
Humans;
Incisor;
Intention;
Periodontium;
Smiling;
Students, Dental;
Tooth
- From:The Journal of the Korean Academy of Periodontology
2006;36(4):817-827
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study was designed 1) to compare the perception of dental professionals and lay people with respect to minor variations in maxillary anterior tooth size and alignment and their relation to the surrounding soft tissues, and 2) to evaluate the normal tooth-gingiva topographical relationships in periodontally healthy young subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Maxillary anterior teeth were intentionally diagrammed in varying degree of deviation with respect to one of three common anterior esthetic discrepancies including variations in crown length, shape of gingival margin, and length of interproximal contact. 17 images were generated to be preferentially selected by 2 groups consisting of dental professionals and lay people (total of 740). Smiling photographs of 120 dental students who had healthy periodontium were taken and the photographic images were analyzed to be classified as 17 kinds of altered image groups. RESULTS: The results demonstrated noticeable difference between the varying levels of discrepancy. Both group preferred gingival margin of lateral incisor to be 0.5mm lower than that of central incisor. Lay people preferred the gingival margin shape that has 2/9 horizontal component of the crown width, while dental professionals preferred the gingival margin shape that has 1/9 horizontal component of the crown width. Lay people preferred longer length of the interproximal contact (two thirds of the crown length), whereas dental professionals preferred shorter length of the interproximal contact (half of the crown length). Photographic analysis of normal esthetic gingival topography revealed 2/9 horizontal component and short length of the interproximal contact which was of the hybrid nature of the preferences shared by lay people and dental professionals. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show that dental professionals and lay people demonstrated significant difference in their preference of dental esthetic components, which may then influence the decision making process by dental professionals with respect to designing the anterior esthetic gingival line.
