The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 139, No 10, 1318-1327.
© 2008 American Dental Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ker, A.J.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenstiel, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ker, A.J.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenstiel, S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Esthestics

COVER STORY

JADA Continuing Education

Esthetics and Smile Characteristics From the Layperson’s Perspective

A Computer-Based Survey Study



A.J. Ker, DDS, MS, Richard Chan, DDS, MS, Henry W. Fields, DDS, MS, MSD, Mike Beck, DDS, MA and Stephen Rosenstiel, BDS, MSD

Background. The paradigm shift from occlusion to esthetics places more emphasis on the subtle relationships among the teeth and the interplay with the soft tissues. The authors of this study quantified the ideal and maximum acceptable deviations for smile characteristics.

Methods. The authors created a survey by using a digital image editing software package, which enabled raters to manipulate intraoral photographs featured in the survey. They altered smile characteristics in photos of a sex-neutral face showing nasal tip to mentolabial fold. The authors administered an electronic survey in Boston (n = 78); Columbus, Ohio (n = 81); and Seattle (n = 84). An interactive interface allowed raters to select the ideal for each smile characteristic presented and identify the range of acceptability for the variables.

Results. Raters were reliable ({kappa} = 0.34–0.88). Survey location was not significant except that raters from the West accepted a broader smile than did those from the Midwest and the East. Raters identified ideals and thresholds for the following smile characteristics: smile arc; buccal corridor; gingival display; canine and posterior crown torque, ideal and large corridor; maxillary midline to face; maxillary to mandibular midline; overbite; maxillary central incisor gingival height discrepancy; maxillary lateral incisor gingival height discrepancy; maxillary central to lateral incisal step; maxillary central incisor crown width-to-height ratio; maxillary central-to-lateral incisal ratio; and occlusal cant. Generally, the values for ideal paralleled existing data, and new guidelines for some variables emerged. The ranges of acceptability were large.

Conclusions. The ideal and an acceptable range for each smile characteristic can be identified reliably.

Practice implications. Laypeople can reliably identify ideal smile characteristics. The ranges of acceptable deviations for smile characteristics are large, and practitioners should avoid unnecessarily sensitizing patients to minor discrepancies.

Key Words: Smile esthetics; smile arc; buccal corridor; attractiveness; tooth proportion; gingival display; orthodontics; dental esthetics




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Orthod.Home page
Relevant research from non-orthodontic journals
J. Orthod., June 1, 2009; 36(2): 130 - 133.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2008 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.