Einstein International Journal Organization(EIJO)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the Perception of Smile Esthetics among General population using a question are study.

Materials and Methods: Perception of smile esthetics was done on 211 subjects aged between 15-48 years which included 107 males and 104 females randomly from Desh Bhagat university, Punjab. The people in this survey were given a set of 20 questions which were answered after a look through reading. Each individual was evaluated on the basis of their choice and opinion regarding smile. Descriptive statistics was used to find the mean and standard deviation of age and frequencies of other independent variables and questions. Chi-square test was used to find the association between the independent variables and questions.

Results: Chi-square test revealed an association between age groups and certain questions included in the questionnaire, as for Appearance (2), Embarrassed (9) Lip colour (18).The association was found to be statistically significant .Similarly, an association was found between gender and questions, as Seeing(3),What about  smile(4), What if your gums (7),If  lips do not close (8), Embarrassed to visit (9), Smile in life partner(10),Habits(12),Does your smile make you introverted(13),Affected a personal relationship(14),Your lips size(16), Appearance during smiling(17), Root surface is visible and want them corrected(20)and the results were statistically significant(p<0.05).

Conclusions:  Disparity of perception among individuals of different age and sex will always prevail, hence an overall assessment of smile esthetics of the general population should be kept in mind. An equal importance needs to be given to the patient’s desire within the boundaries of orthodontics for the sake of efficient and appreciable esthetic outcome.

1. Jacoby H. The “ballista spring” system for impacted teeth. Am J Orthod 1979; 75:143-51
2. Crescini A, Giorgetti R, Cortellini P, Pini Prato GP. Tunnel traction of intraosseous impacted maxillary canines. A three-year periodontal follow-up. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994; 105:61-72.
3. Darendeliler AM. Treatment of an impacted canine with magnets. J Clin Orthod 1994; 28:639-43.
4. Li LCF. Orthodontic traction of impacted canine using magnet: A case report. Cases J 2008; 1:382.
5. Lindauer SJ, Isaacson RJ. One-couple orthodontic appliance systems. Semin Orthod 1995; 1:12-24.
6. Samuels RH. Two-archwire technique for alignment of impacted teeth. J Clin Orthod 1997; 31:183-7.
7. Ross Ll. nickel titanium closed-coil spring for extrusion of impacted canines. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33:74-7.
8. Sinha PK. Management of impacted maxillary canines using mandibular Anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115:332-6.
9. Kalra V. the k-9 spring for alignment of impacted canines. J Clin Orthod 2000; 34:606-10.
10. Hauser C. eruption of impacted canines with an Australian helical archwire. J Clin Orthod 2000; 34:538-41.
11. Bowman SJ. the monkey hook: An auxiliary for impacted, rotated, and displaced teeth. J Clin Orthod 2002; 36:375-8.
12. Park HS, Kwon OW, Sung JH. Micro-implant anchorage for forced eruption of impacted canines. J Clin Orthod 2004; 38:297-302.
13. Patel S. Alignment of impacted canines with cantilevers and box loops. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33:82-5.