Multidimensional Severity Phenotypes in Dentofacial Deformities: Cross-Sectional Associations with Quality of Life, Function, and Psychosocial Burden.

Background

Dentofacial deformities (DFDs) comprise heterogeneous sagittal, vertical, transverse, and asymmetry components, yet clinical severity is often summarized using isolated measurements.

Objectives

To operationalize a reproducible composite DFD severity score and evaluate its cross-sectional associations with quality of life, function, airway-related screening indicators, and psychosocial burden.

Methods

In this single-center cross-sectional study, consecutive adults assessed in an orthognathic surgery pathway underwent a prespecified 0-100 severity scoring framework integrating sagittal discrepancy (|Wits| and |ANB deviation|), vertical pattern (SN-MP angle), and asymmetry/transverse variables (chin deviation, asymmetry index, transverse discrepancy, and absolute overjet). Outcomes included the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14), Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ), FACE-Q facial appearance satisfaction scale, PHQ-9, GAD-7, STOP-Bang, functional testing, and CBCT-derived upper-airway metrics.

Results

Severe DFDs had higher composite severity (62.9 ± 12.8 vs. 25.3 ± 10.9), larger sagittal discrepancy (|Wits| 6.3 ± 2.8 vs. 3.1 ± 1.8), and higher SN-MP angles (39.8 ± 7.4 vs. 34.7 ± 7.2) (all p < 0.001). Severe DFDs also had worse OQLQ (36.2 ± 6.2 vs. 24.1 ± 7.2), OHIP-14 (18.3 ± 4.2 vs. 12.4 ± 4.1), FACE-Q satisfaction (45.7 ± 10.3 vs. 67.6 ± 9.6), masticatory performance (59.4 ± 8.5 vs. 75.1 ± 7.5), and smaller airway area (126.7 ± 29.6 vs. 161.4 ± 27.7) (all p < 0.001). In multivariable logistic regression, |Wits|, SN-MP angle, asymmetry index, and lower airway area independently predicted severe status; PHQ-9 was associated with severity in unadjusted analyses but did not retain independent significance after multivariable adjustment. Model discrimination was high (AUC 0.91).

Conclusions

This multidimensional severity framework captures clinically meaningful cross-sectional differences across morphologic, functional, airway-related, and psychosocial domains. Its interpretability remained stable in sensitivity analyses, but external and longitudinal validation is still required before broader implementation.