American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2017
Esthetic perceptions of facial silhouettes after treatment with a mandibular protraction appliance.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Molina de Paula Eliana Cássia, de Castro Ferreira Conti Ana Cláudia, Siqueira Danilo Furquim, Valarelli Danilo Pinelli, de Almeida-Pedrin Renata Rodrigues
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the effects on the facial silhouettes produced by a mandibular protraction appliance associated with corrective treatment in Class II patients.
METHODS: The sample consisted of 54 (27 initial and 27 final) lateral radiographs from 27 patients. Of these patients, 14 were girls and 13 were boys, with a mean initial age of 12.27 years and a mean treatment period of 2.9 years. An album containing the silhouettes of the pretreatment and posttreatment profiles based on the lateral cephalograms of the patients was prepared. Then, 60 orthodontists and 60 laypeople chose the more esthetic facial silhouette (A or B) and the amount of alterations they perceived between the 2 silhouettes, according to a visual analog scale. A paired t test was used to compare the 2 groups of evaluators with a 5% significance level.
RESULTS: Differences between the preferences regarding the pretreatment and posttreatment facial silhouettes were statistically significant for both groups. The posttreatment silhouettes were preferred by most evaluators. The visual analog scale scores showed that the lay evaluators identified greater differences between the pretreatment and posttreatment silhouettes than did the orthodontists (P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evaluators' judgments, treatment with the mandibular protraction appliance had a positive effect on the facial silhouette, and the laypeople better perceived this effect.
METHODS: The sample consisted of 54 (27 initial and 27 final) lateral radiographs from 27 patients. Of these patients, 14 were girls and 13 were boys, with a mean initial age of 12.27 years and a mean treatment period of 2.9 years. An album containing the silhouettes of the pretreatment and posttreatment profiles based on the lateral cephalograms of the patients was prepared. Then, 60 orthodontists and 60 laypeople chose the more esthetic facial silhouette (A or B) and the amount of alterations they perceived between the 2 silhouettes, according to a visual analog scale. A paired t test was used to compare the 2 groups of evaluators with a 5% significance level.
RESULTS: Differences between the preferences regarding the pretreatment and posttreatment facial silhouettes were statistically significant for both groups. The posttreatment silhouettes were preferred by most evaluators. The visual analog scale scores showed that the lay evaluators identified greater differences between the pretreatment and posttreatment silhouettes than did the orthodontists (P <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the evaluators' judgments, treatment with the mandibular protraction appliance had a positive effect on the facial silhouette, and the laypeople better perceived this effect.