The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2024
Association of Clinical, Biomechanical, and Psychosocial Factors with Smile Dynamics in Unilateral Cleft Lip: A Multicenter Observational Study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wong Lucinda, Firth Fiona, Fowler Peter, Jack Hannah, Bennani Hamza, Campbell Thomas Noble, Farella Mauro
Аннотация
ObjectiveTo investigate the association between clinical, biomechanical, and psychosocial factors and smiling behavior in individuals with treated unilateral cleft lip with or without cleft palate (UCL ± P) compared to non-cleft controls.DesignMulticenter observational study in New Zealand.ParticipantsIndividuals aged ≥15 (N = 42) comprised 2 study groups: a UCL ± P group (N = 21) and a non-cleft control group (N = 21).MethodsParticipants viewed an amusing video while their facial expressions were recorded. Smile features were automatically detected via software. A clinical outcome, nasolabial esthetics, was scored using the Asher-McDade system. Perioral biomechanical properties were measured via myotonometry. Smile Esthetics-related Quality of Life (SERQoL), Orofacial Esthetics Scale (OES), and personality (IPIP-NEO-60) questionnaires were completed.ResultsSmile features and personality traits did not differ between the groups. Participants with UCL ± P exhibited higher stiffness (+44.2%; Cohen's d = 1.6) and tone (+22.6%; Cohen's d = 1.9) at the cleft scar site, and higher decrement (or lower elasticity, +8.5%; Cohen's d = 0.8) adjacent to the scar. Nasolabial esthetics and elasticity of the scar correlated with the duration of smiles and relative smile time (-0.50 < R < -0.44; p < .05). Participants in the UCL ± P group had lower scores for the OES and higher impacts on SERQoL for social contacts and dental self-confidence.ConclusionsAdolescents and adults with UCL ± P exhibit similar smile behavior as their cleft-free peers-at least in non-social settings. Nasolabial esthetics and perioral biomechanical properties are associated with propensity to smile. UCL ± P is negatively associated with smile-related quality of life and an individual's perception of their facial appearance.