Abstract
ObjectivesTo assess the perceived facial changes in class II division 1, convex profile patients treated with functional followed by fixed orthodontic appliances.Subjects and methodsThe study sample consisted of 36 pairs of pre- and post-treatment photographs (frontal and profile, at rest) of 12 patients treated with activator, 12 with twin-block, and 12 controls with normal profiles, treated without functional appliances. All photographs were presented in pairs to 10 orthodontists, 10 patients, 10 parents, and 10 laypersons. Visual analog scale (VAS) ratings of changes in facial appearance were assessed.ResultsThe patient groups were similar in sex distributions, age, and treatment duration. The different rater groups showed strong to excellent agreement. There were no significant differences among treatment groups (F = 0.91; P = 0.526; Wilks lambda = 0.93), raters (F = 1.68; P = 0.054; Wilks lambda = 0.83), and when testing the combined effect of treatment and rater on the results (F = 0.72; P = 0.866; Wilks lambda = 0.85). The raters detected slightly more positive changes in the activator and twin-block groups, compared to the control group, regarding the lower face and the lips, but these findings did not reach significance. Furthermore, their magnitude hardly exceeded 1/20th of the total VAS length.LimitationsRetrospective study design.ConclusionsThe perceived facial changes of convex profile patients treated with functional, followed by fixed orthodontic appliances, did not differ from those observed in normal profile patients, when full-face frontal and profile photos were simultaneously assessed. Consequently, professionals should be skeptical regarding the improvement of a patient’s facial appearance when this treatment option is used.
Highlights
Facial esthetics play a significant role in everyday life and interpersonal relationships [1]
The perceived facial changes of convex profile patients treated with functional, followed by fixed orthodontic appliances, did not differ from those observed in normal profile patients, when full-face frontal and profile photos were simultaneously assessed
Only a small favorable change in facial appearance was perceived when raters were asked to evaluate the esthetic outcome of functional orthodontic treatment on convex profile class II division 1 patients [9]
Summary
Facial esthetics play a significant role in everyday life and interpersonal relationships [1]. Orthognathic and orthodontic irregularities are frequently accompanied by suboptimal facial esthetics This includes class II malocclusions that have convex profiles and retruded mandibular position of hard and soft tissues [2,3,4]. Only a small favorable change in facial appearance was perceived when raters were asked to evaluate the esthetic outcome of functional orthodontic treatment on convex profile class II division 1 patients [9]. This underlines the need for more studies investigating the perceived improvement of facial appearance, achieved by treatments that have such aims
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
