CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2021; 15(04): 630-638
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1726670
Original Article

Smile Attractiveness Evaluation of Patients Selected for a U.S.-Based Board Certification Examination

Jen Soh
1   Private Practice, Singapore
,
Zheng Dong Wang
2   Department of Orthodontics, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
,
Wei Bing Zhang
2   Department of Orthodontics, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
,
3   Department of Orthodontics, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, United States
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objectives The aims of this study were to assess smile attractiveness of a collection of 68 smiling photographs of successfully treated cases submitted to the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) clinical examination and identify variables that influence the assessment.

Materials and Methods A panel of 81 non-Caucasian assessors from various clinical disciplines were instructed to score the smile attractiveness on a visual analog scale from 1 (least attractive) to 10 (most attractive) and to select which components contributed to a lesser attractive smile. The mean, standard deviations (SDs), and quartiles of the smile attractiveness were obtained with descriptive statistics. Multilinear regression analysis was performed to investigate the scores of the perceived quality of smile attractiveness when the clinical disciplines and gender of the assessors were the factors taken into consideration. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated to establish the relationship between smile attractiveness and the achievement of a perfect smile.

Results The mean (SD) rating of each clinical photograph of the anterior occlusion on smiling ranged from 3.11 (1.47) as the least attractive smile to 7.59 (1.45) as the most attractive smile. The overall mean (SD) score for smile attractiveness was 5.30 (1.10). Problems associated with teeth, gingiva, and lips corresponded with a reduction of the smile attractiveness score by 1.56, 1.82, and 1.47, respectively. Gender was not associated with smile attractiveness ratings. Orthodontists, periodontists, and prosthodontists demonstrated no difference in the ratings, while plastic surgeons were more critical than orthodontists regarding smile attractiveness.

Conclusions This study suggested that only 2 out of 68 AOB validated treatment finishes had a perfect and attractive smile.



Publication History

Article published online:
24 July 2021

© 2021. European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Lin F, Ren M, Yao L, He Y, Guo J, Ye Q. Psychosocial impact of dental esthetics regulates motivation to seek orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016; 150 (03) 476-482
  • 2 Pithon MM, Nascimento CC, Barbosa GC, Coqueiro RdaS. Do dental esthetics have any influence on finding a job?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 146 (04) 423-429
  • 3 Khela S, Newton JT, Jeremiah HG. The effect of malocclusion on dating prospects. J Orthod 2020; 47 (01) 30-37
  • 4 Dos Santos PR, Meneghim MC, Ambrosano GM, Filho MV, Vedovello SA. Influence of quality of life, self-perception, and self-esteem on orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017; 151 (01) 143-147
  • 5 Olsen JA, Inglehart MR. Malocclusions and perceptions of attractiveness, intelligence, and personality, and behavioral intentions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140 (05) 669-679
  • 6 Christou T, Abarca R, Christou V, Kau CH. Smile outcome comparison of Invisalign and traditional fixed-appliance treatment: a case-control study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157 (03) 357-364
  • 7 Christou T, Betlej A, Aswad N, Ogdon D, Kau CH. Clinical effectiveness of orthodontic treatment on smile esthetics: a systematic review. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2019; 11: 89-101
  • 8 Sadowsky SJ. An overview of treatment considerations for esthetic restorations: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96 (06) 433-442
  • 9 Sarver DM. The importance of incisor positioning in the esthetic smile: the smile arc. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 120 (02) 98-111
  • 10 Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: part 2. Smile analysis and treatment strategies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124 (02) 116-127
  • 11 Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: part 1. Evolution of the concept and dynamic records for smile capture. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124 (01) 4-12
  • 12 Nold SL, Horvath SD, Stampf S, Blatz MB. Analysis of select facial and dental esthetic parameters. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2014; 34 (05) 623-629
  • 13 Cao L, Zhang K, Bai D, Jing Y, Tian Y, Guo Y. Effect of maxillary incisor labiolingual inclination and anteroposterior position on smiling profile esthetics. Angle Orthod 2011; 81 (01) 121-129
  • 14 Heravi F, Rashed R, Abachizadeh H. Esthetic preferences for the shape of anterior teeth in a posed smile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 139 (06) 806-814
  • 15 Ong E, Brown RA, Richmond S. Peer assessment of dental attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130 (02) 163-169
  • 16 Joiner A, Luo W. Tooth colour and whiteness: a review. J Dent 2017; 67S: S3-S10
  • 17 Goodacre CJ. Gingival esthetics. J Prosthet Dent 1990; 64 (01) 1-12
  • 18 Kokich VO, Kokich VG, Kiyak HA. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: asymmetric and symmetric situations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130 (02) 141-151
  • 19 Oliveira PLE, Motta A, Pithon M, Mucha J. Details of pleasing smiles. Int J Esthet Dent 2018; 13 (04) 494-514
  • 20 Wang C, Hu WJ, Liang LZ, Zhang YL, Chung KH. Esthetics and smile-related characteristics assessed by laypersons. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018; 30 (02) 136-145
  • 21 Scott CR, Goonewardene MS, Murray K. Influence of lips on the perception of malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130 (02) 152-162
  • 22 Parrini S, Rossini G, Castroflorio T, Fortini A, Deregibus A, Debernardi C. Laypeople’s perceptions of frontal smile esthetics: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016; 150 (05) 740-750
  • 23 Pinho S, Ciriaco C, Faber J, Lenza MA. Impact of dental asymmetries on the perception of smile esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132 (06) 748-753
  • 24 Soh J, Chew MT, Chan YH. Perceptions of dental esthetics of Asian orthodontists and laypersons. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130 (02) 170-176
  • 25 Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, Andrews M. The PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14 (03) 180-187
  • 26 Daniels C, Richmond S. The development of the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON).. J Orthod 2000; 27 (02) 149-162
  • 27 Akyalcin S, Frels LK, English JD, Laman S. Analysis of smile esthetics in American Board of Orthodontic patients. Angle Orthod 2014; 84 (03) 486-491
  • 28 Schabel BJ, McNamara JA, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Jamieson SA. The relationship between posttreatment smile esthetics and the ABO Objective Grading System. Angle Orthod 2008; 78 (04) 579-584
  • 29 Kau CH, Christou T, Xie RB, Abou-Saleh T. Rating of smile attractiveness of patients finished to the American Board of Orthodontics standards. J Orofac Orthop 2020; 81 (04) 239-248
  • 30 Swets JA. Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: their ROCs and implied models. Psychol Bull 1986; 99 (01) 100-117
  • 31 Swets JA. ROC analysis applied to the evaluation of medical imaging techniques. Invest Radiol 1979; 14 (02) 109-121
  • 32 Durgekar SGKN, Naik V. The ideal smile and its orthodontic implications. World J Orthod 2010; 11 (03) 211-220
  • 33 Jenny J, Cons NC. Establishing malocclusion severity levels on the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) scale. Aust Dent J 1996; 41 (01) 43-46
  • 34 Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod 1989; 11 (03) 309-320
  • 35 Albhaisi Z, Al-Khateeb SN, Abu Alhaija ES. Enamel demineralization during clear aligner orthodontic treatment compared with fixed appliance therapy, evaluated with quantitative light-induced fluorescence: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157 (05) 594-601
  • 36 Verrusio C, Iorio-Siciliano V, Blasi A, Leuci S, Adamo D, Nicolò M. The effect of orthodontic treatment on periodontal tissue inflammation: a systematic review. Quintessence Int 2018; 49 (01) 69-77
  • 37 Abdelkarim A, Jerrold L. Strategies for improved interdisciplinary care and communication in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017; 152 (05) 717-721
  • 38 Walder JF, Freeman K, Lipp MJ, Nicolay OF, Cisneros GJ. Photographic and videographic assessment of the smile: objective and subjective evaluations of posed and spontaneous smiles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 144 (06) 793-801
  • 39 Mahn E, Sampaio CS, Pereira da Silva B. et al Comparing the use of static versus dynamic images to evaluate a smile. J Prosthet Dent 2020; 123 (05) 739-746
  • 40 Al Taki A, Khalesi M, Shagmani M, Yahia I, Al Kaddah F. Perceptions of altered smile esthetics: a comparative evaluation in orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons. Int J Dent 2016; 2016: 7815274
  • 41 Kokich Jr VO, Kiyak HA, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent 1999; 11 (06) 311-324