Facial-profile attractiveness changes in adult patients treated with the Herbst appliance
- PMID: 24825829
- DOI: 10.1007/s00056-014-0210-3
Facial-profile attractiveness changes in adult patients treated with the Herbst appliance
Abstract
Aim: The goal of this study was to compare facial profile attractiveness changes of adult patients treated with the Herbst appliance assessed by orthodontists and laypeople.
Materials and methods: The patient sample comprised 28 adult Herbst patients. Facial profile photographs of the patients were randomly divided into two evaluation sets (before T0, after treatment T1). Ten members of the Angle Society of Europe (orthodontists) and 10 dental students in their third semester (laymen) rated both sets of photographs using Visual Analog Scales (VAS) with an interval of 1 day between the ratings.
Results: On average, both orthodontists and students found an improvement in facial profile attractiveness through Herbst appliance treatment (VAS T1-T0 = 0.3 ± 1.9 cm). However, the interindividual perception of profile attractiveness varied greatly in the two rater groups. For both time periods (T0, T1), lower VAS ratings were given by students than by orthodontists.
Conclusion: Herbst therapy in adult patients generally improves facial profile attractiveness. Students rated facial profiles more critically than orthodontists.
Similar articles
-
Soft tissue profile changes after Functional Mandibular Advancer or Herbst appliance treatment in class II patients.Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Mar;22(2):971-980. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2177-0. Epub 2017 Jul 18. Clin Oral Investig. 2018. PMID: 28721528
-
Esthetic perception of facial profile changes in Class II patients treated with Herbst or Forsus appliances.Angle Orthod. 2020 Jul 1;90(4):571-577. doi: 10.2319/052719-362.1. Angle Orthod. 2020. PMID: 33378491 Free PMC article.
-
Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Mar;151(3):559-564. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.08.028. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017. PMID: 28257740
-
A non-cephalometric two-dimensional appraisal of soft tissue changes by functional therapy in Class II patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur J Orthod. 2022 Sep 19;44(5):503-512. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjab084. Eur J Orthod. 2022. PMID: 35064669
-
A Mini Review of Using the Oralift Appliance and a Pilot Study to See if 3D Imaging Techniques Could Improve Outcomes.Open Dent J. 2018 Mar 30;12:283-295. doi: 10.2174/1874210601812010283. eCollection 2018. Open Dent J. 2018. PMID: 29760821 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Attractiveness of the facial profile: comparison of Class II patients treated with Twin Force® or intermaxillary elastics.Dental Press J Orthod. 2021 Oct 15;26(5):e212014. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.26.5.e212014.oar. eCollection 2021. Dental Press J Orthod. 2021. PMID: 34669827 Free PMC article.
-
Soft tissue profile changes after Functional Mandibular Advancer or Herbst appliance treatment in class II patients.Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Mar;22(2):971-980. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2177-0. Epub 2017 Jul 18. Clin Oral Investig. 2018. PMID: 28721528
-
Evaluation of Facial Aesthetic Changes in Growing Class II Patients Treated with Herbst or Elastodontics: A Retrospective Study.Dent J (Basel). 2024 Dec 17;12(12):411. doi: 10.3390/dj12120411. Dent J (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39727468 Free PMC article.
-
Soft tissue effects of three different Class II/1-camouflage treatment strategies.J Orofac Orthop. 2017 Mar;78(2):153-165. doi: 10.1007/s00056-016-0066-9. Epub 2017 Jan 13. J Orofac Orthop. 2017. PMID: 28084515 Clinical Trial. English.
-
The effect of low intensity pulsed ultrasound on mandibular condylar growth in young adult rats.Bone Rep. 2021 Sep 3;15:101122. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2021.101122. eCollection 2021 Dec. Bone Rep. 2021. PMID: 34527791 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources