Smile Aesthetics among Late Adolescents: Perspective of Adolescents, General Dentists and Orthodontists

• Main Authors: Kavitha Odathurai Marusamy, Ullal Anand Nayak, Prathibha Anand Nayak, Saravanan Ramasamy
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: JCDR Research and Publications Private Limited 2020-07-01
• Series: Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research
• Subjects: adolescent subjects; buccal corridor space; gingival display; midline symmetry; smile index
• Online Access: https://jcdr.net/articles/PDF/13849/44486_CE[Ra1]_F(KM)_PF1(AKA_SL)_PFA(SL)_PN(SL).pdf

Introduction: An adolescent’s personal experiences, peer influences and social environment can affect their preference towards smile aesthetics and have influence apart from the opinion of their orthodontists. Aim: To evaluate and compare the preferences regarding smile arc, gingival display, midline symmetry, shape and size of incisor teeth, buccal corridor space and smile index of adolescent subjects between late adolescents, general dentists and orthodontists. Materials and Methods: A total of 52 orthodontists, 111 general dentists and 275 adolescents (156 females, 119 males) had participated in this cross-sectional study from 1st September 2019 to 31st January 2020. Each participant was shown a photo album consisting of 5 sets of photographs of male and female adolescent subjects and was asked to rate them on 7 selected variables. The data obtained was subjected to comparison between the groups using Chi-square test. Results: While assessing smile of the female subject, other than the incisal edge position, the intergroup comparisons of gingival display (p=0.0001), midline symmetry (p=0.0001), shape of incisor teeth (p-value=0.0001), buccal corridor space (p=0.001), ratio of central: lateral incisor (p=0.016) and smile index (p=0.0001) were statistically significant. While assessing smile of the male subject, the intergroup comparisons of incisal edge position (p=0.0001), gingival display (p=0.001), midline symmetry (p=0.007), shape of incisor teeth (p-value=0.0001), buccal corridor space (p=0.0001), ratio of central: lateral incisor (p=0.0001) and smile index (p=0.0001) were statistically significant. Orthodontists’ accepted gingival display of 0-2 mm, midline deviation up to 2 mm and buccal corridor space of upto 5 mm and upto 25% increase in smile index in both genders. Conclusion: The Orthodontists and dentists have more similarities than differences in comparison to adolescents with respect to the smile preferences of adolescent subjects.