Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pendahuluan: Penelitian bertujuan untuk mengetahui perbedaan persepsi estetika senyum terhadap ukuran buccal corridor antara ortodontis dan orang awam Indonesia. Metode: Ukuran buccal corridor dimodifikasi secara digital dengan perbedaan 5%, dari 0% sampai 25% buccal corridor terhadap lebar komisura dalam sehingga diperoleh enam ukuran. Persepsi estetika senyum menurut 24 ortodontis dan 24 orang awam ras deutromalayid diperoleh dengan menggunakan visual analog scale (VAS) pada 12 gambar yang terdiri dari enam ukuran buccal corridor pada gambaran wajah tampak depan saat tersenyum (GW) dan enam ukuran pada gambaran sirkumoral tampak depan saat tersenyum (GS). Hasil: Tidak terdapat perbedaan persepsi estetika senyum yang bermakna terhadap ukuran BC sebesar 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% dan 20% antara ortodontis dan orang awam Indonesia pada GW dan GS kecuali ukuran BC sebesar 25%. Tidak terdapat perbedaan penilaian persepsi estetika senyum yang bermakna antara penggunaan GW dan GS. Kesimpulan: Pada GW, ortodontis dan orang awam sama-sama menganggap ukuran buccal corridor yang sempit merupakan senyum yang paling menarik. Sedangkan pada GS, ortodontis lebih menyukai ukuran buccal corridor yang sempit namun kelompok orang awam lebih menyukai ukuran buccal corridor yang sangat lebar.

---

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the difference of smile esthetics perception on buccal corridors width between Indonesian orthodontists and laypersons by means of digitally manipulated photographs, as well as compare assessments of fullface view (FFV) and close-up view of the mouth (CUVM) images. Methods: Facial photographs were taken smiling deutromalayid female, displaying first molar to first molar. Buccal corridors were modified digitally in 5% increments, from 0% to 25% buccal corridor compared with the inner commissural width. The rendered images, 6 of FFVs and 6 of CUVMs, were assessed by 24 Indonesian orthodontists and 24 Indonesian laypersons who rated the attractiveness of each smile by means of a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: There were no significant differences on smile esthetics perception of 0%, 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% BC width between Indonesian orthodontists and laypersons on FFV and CUWM except BC width of 25%. There were no significant differences in the assessment of smile esthetic perception between the use of FFV and CUVM. Conclusion: At FFV, both orthodontists and laypersons preferred narrow buccal corridor. While at CUWM, orthodontists preferred the narrow buccal corridor but laypersons preferred very wide buccal corridor."

"Latar belakang: Tujuan utama perawatan ortodonti bukan hanya untuk mendapatkan oklusi yang ideal tetapi juga meningkatkan estetika wajah. Profil wajah merupakan salah satu indikator untuk melihat estetika wajah. Persepsi Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam mengenai profil wajah perlu diketahui untuk mencapai tujuan perawatan ortodontik. Tujuan: Mengetahui perbedaan persepsi antara Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam tentang profil wajah berdasarkan analisis Arnett dan Bregman. Metode: Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian analitik komparatif dengan desain potong lintang. Penilaian profil wajah dengan sudut 50,80 ,110, 140 ,170 menurut analisis Arnett dan Bregman dilakukan oleh Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam yang masing-masing berjumlah 35 orang menggunakan VAS. Data diuji menggunakan Kruskal-Wallis dan Mann Whitney. Hasil: Terdapat perbedaan yang bermakna antara persepsi Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam terhadap profil wajah (p<0,05). Tidak terdapat perbedaan bermakna menurut statistik antara persepsi Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam terhadap profil wajah dengan sudut kecembungan 50,80, dan 110 pada laki-laki (p> 0,05) dan 50,110,140, dan 170 pada perempuan (p> 0,05). Ortodontis dan Dokter Gigi memiliki preferensi pada profil wajah lurus dan masyarakat awam memiliki perferensi pada profil wajah cekung. Kesesuaian paling tinggi terhadap analisis jaringan lunak menurut Arnett dan Bregman yaitu Ortodontis, diikuti oleh Dokter Gigi, dan kemudian masyarakat awam. Kesimpulan: Tidak terdapat perbedaan persepsi antara Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam tentang profil wajah, namun terdapat perbedaan persepsi masing-masing Ortodontis, Dokter Gigi, dan masyarakat awam terhadap variasi sudut kecembungan wajah (50,80 ,110, 140 ,170) menurut Arnett dan Bregman.

---

Background: The main purpose of orthodontics treatment is not only to achieve ideal occlusion but also to improve facial aesthetics. Facial profile is one of the indicators to show facial aesthetics. The facial profile perception of Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople sometimes need to be assessed to meet the purpose of orthodontics treatment. Objectives: To compare facial profile perception between Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople according to Arnett and Bregman facial profile analysis. Methods: This study was a comparative analytic with cross-sectional design. Facial profile convexity of 50, 80,110,140,170 in male and female were assessed using VAS by 35 Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople respectively. Data were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis and the Mann Whitney test. Result: There was a significant difference of facial profile perception between Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople (p< 0.05) There was no significant difference of facial profile perception with facial profile convexity of 50, 80,110 in male (p> 0.05) and 50,110,140,170 in female (p> 0.05) between Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople. Orthodontists and Dentists preference was a straight facial profile and the Laypeople preference was a concave facial profile. The group that met the highest agreement with Arnett and Bregman facial profile analysis was the Orthodontists, followed by the Dentists, and Laypeople. Conclusion: There was no significant difference of facial profile perception between Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople. However, there was significant difference of facial profile perception between Orthodontists, Dentists, and Laypeople with variation facial convexity (50, 80,110,140,170) according to Arnett and Bregman."

"Latar Belakang: Penelitian persepsi Ortodontis dan masyarakat awam tentang profil wajah biasanya dilakukan untuk mengevaluasi kesepakatan di antara kelompok tersebut. Namun, masih sedikit penelitian yang menghubungkan persepsi dengan parameter jaringan lunak profil wajah. Tujuan: Mengetahui perbedaan persepsi ortodontis dan masyarakat awam dan korelasinya terhadap parameter jaringan lunak profil wajah menurut Arnett, Schwarz, dan Rickett. Metode: Penelitian ini adalah analitik korelatif dengan desain potong lintang. Foto profil 52 orang dinilai estetikanya oleh 17 ortodontis dan 17 masyarakat awam pada kuesioner. Uji korelasi Spearman dilakukan antara nilai modus persepsi VAS oleh Ortodontis dan masyarakat awam dengan selisih pengukuran parameter jaringan lunak Arnett, Schwarz, Rickett pada foto terhadap nilai normal. Hasil: Terdapat perbedaan bermakna antara persepsi ortodontis dan masyarakat awam tentang profil wajah (p=0,001). Uji kappa menunjukkan kesepakatan antara Ortodontis dan masyarakat awam yang rendah (p=0,035 untuk persepsi estetika, p=0,112 untuk persepsi kecembungan). Terdapat korelasi linier negatif sedang yang bermakna secara statistik antara persepsi estetika Ortodontis dan parameter jaringan lunak profil wajah menurut Rickett (Ls/bibir atas) (r=-0,287, p=0,039), tetapi tidak terdapat korelasi linier yang bermakna secara statistik antara persepsi Ortodontis dan masyarakat awam dengan parameter jaringan lunak profil wajah menurut Arnett, Schwarz, dan Rickett (Li/bibir bawah). Kesimpulan: Terdapat korelasi antara persepsi Ortodontis dengan parameter jaringan lunak profil wajah menurut Rickett (Ls/bibir atas).

---

.Background: Facial profile perception of Orthodontists and Laypeople was usually studied to assess the agreement between them. However, there is still lack of study that correlates the facial profile perception with soft tissue parameters. Objectives: This study was aimed to evaluate the perception of Orthodontists and Laypeople about the facial profile and its possible correlation with soft tissue facial profile parameters according to Arnett, Schwarz, and Rickett. Methods: This study was correlative analytical study with cross-sectional design. The facial profile photographs of 52 people were rated by 17 Orthodontists and 17 Laypeople on the questionnaire. The correlation between the mode value of VAS perception score by Orthodontists and Laypeople with the difference of soft tissue facial profile parameters at photographs from the normal value according to Arnett, Schwarz, and Rickett was tested using Spearman's correlation. Results: Regarding the perception of Orthodontists and Laypeople on facial profile, statistically significant difference was detected (p=0.001). The Kappa statistic test showed poor agreement between Orthodontists and Laypeople in facial profile perception (p=0.035 for pleasantness, p=0.112 for convexity). The correlation test showed that there was statistically significant difference (moderate negative linear correlation) between Orthodontists’ perception with soft tissue facial profile parameters according to Rickett (Ls/upper lip) (r=-0.287, p=0.039), but there was no statistically significant difference (linear correlation) between Orthodontists’ and Laypeople’ perceptions with the soft tissue facial profile parameters according to Arnett, Schwarz, and Rickett (Li/lower lip). Conclusion: It was concluded that there was correlation between Orthodontists’ perception with soft tissue facial profile parameters according to Rickett (Ls/upper lip.

"