Self-perception of dentofacial attractiveness among patients requiring orthognathic surgery

Objective: To test the hypothesis that the self-perception of dental and facial attractiveness among patients requiring orthognathic surgery is no different from that of control patients.

Materials and Methods: Happiness with dental and facial appearance was assessed using questionnaires completed by 162 patients who required orthognathic treatment and 157 control subjects. Visual analog scale, binary, and open response data were collected. Analysis was carried out using a general linear model, logistic regression, and chi-square tests.

Results: Orthognathic patients were less happy with their dental appearance than were controls. Class II patients and women had lower happiness scores for their dental appearance. Among orthognathic patients, the "shape" and "prominence" of their teeth were the most frequent causes of concern. Older subjects, women, and orthognathic patients were less happy with their facial appearance. Class III orthognathic patients, older subjects, and women were more likely to have looked at their own face in profile. A greater proportion of Class II subjects than Class III subjects wished to change their appearance.

Conclusions: The hypothesis is rejected. The findings indicate that women and patients requiring orthognathic surgery had lower levels of happiness with their dentofacial appearance. Although Class II patients exhibited the lowest levels of happiness with their dental appearance, there was some evidence that concerns and awareness about their facial profile were more pronounced among the Class III patients.

Psychological status of patients referred for orthognathic correction of skeletal II and III discrepancies

Objective: To establish the extent of psychological problems among patients who require orthognathic treatment. Materials and Methods: Five aspects of psychological functioning were assessed for 162 patients who required orthognathic treatment and compared with 157 control subjects.

Results: Analysis of variance did not detect any significant difference in the five psychological scores recorded for the skeletal II, skeletal III, and control groups. The proportion of subjects with one or more psychological measure beyond the normal range was 27% for skeletal II subjects, 25% for skeletal III subjects, and 26% for control subjects. One skeletal II subject (1.5%), three skeletal III subjects (3%), and five control subjects (3%) required referral for psychological counseling.

Conclusions: The orthognathic patients did not differ significantly from the control subjects in their psychological status. © 2010 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Long-term occlusal and soft-tissue profile outcomes after treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with fixed appliances

Introduction: Our objective was to determine which factors were predictive of good long-term outcomes after fixed appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Methods: Two hundred seven patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion were examined in early adulthood at a mean of 4.6 years after treatment with fixed appliances. The peer assessment rating index was used to evaluate dental alignment and occlusal relationships. The soft-tissue profile was assessed with the Holdaway angle. Results: Logistic regression identified 3 pretreatment variables that were predictive of a good facial profile (Holdaway angle) at recall: the lower lip to E-plane distance (P

Economic evaluation and its place in dentistry

Objective: This review intends to examine current research surrounding economic assessment in the delivery of dental care. Economic evaluation is an acknowledged method of analysing dental care systems by means of efficiency, effectiveness, efficacy and availability. Though this is a widely used method in medicine, it is underappreciated in dentistry. As the delivery of health care changes there has been recent demand by the public, the profession, and those funding dental treatment to investigate current practices regarding programs themselves and resource allocation.
Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted regarding health economics. The initial search was carried out using Pubmed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and The Cochrane Library with search terms “health AND economics AND dentistry”. A secondary search was conducted with the terms “heath care AND dentistry AND”. The third part of the entry was changed to address the aims and included the following terms: “cost benefit analysis”, “efficiency criteria”, “supply & demand”, “cost-effectiveness”, “cost minimisation”, “cost utility”, “resource allocation”, “QALY”, and “delivery and economics”. Limits were applied to all searches to only include papers published in English within the last eight years.
Results: Preliminary results demonstrated a limited number of economic evaluations conducted in dentistry. Those that were carried out were mainly confined to the United Kingdom. Furthermore analysis was mainly restricted to restorative dentistry, followed by orthodontics, and maxillofacial surgery, thereby demonstrating a need for investigation in all fields of dentistry.
Conclusion: Health economics has been overlooked in the past regarding delivery of dental care and resource allocation. Economic appraisal is a crucial part of generating an effective and efficient dental care system. It is becoming increasingly evident that there is a need for economic evaluation in all dental fields.