Smile aesthetics as perceived by dental students: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundAn aesthetic smile has a number of components, and people generally equate a good dental appearance with success in many areas of life. The features that determine smile aesthetics could provide significant insights into post-treatment satisfaction and may predict a patient’s objectives when undergoing treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how smile characteristics are perceived by dental students.MethodsThe study was performed in 431 local and international dental students at the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. The study data were collected using a three-part questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire included sociodemographic items, i.e., student gender, age, nationality, and years of study; the second consisted of questions about facial aesthetic features; and the third elicited responses to photographs of 17 different smiles retrieved from the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Clinic of Orthodontics database. The smile aesthetics were evaluated according to their dentolabial, dentogingival, dental, and dental arch characteristics using a 5-point numeric rating scale (1, best; 5, worst). The data were analysed using the Pearson’s chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests.ResultsThe study included 336 local and 95 international dental students (132 men [30.6%], 299 women [69.4%]). Significantly more women than men focused on a person’s teeth when communicating (41.5% vs.32.6%, p < 0.005). Women were more critical than men when evaluating gingival smile, the ‘golden proportion’, occlusal cant, and dental crowding. The most unfavourable smile characteristics were identified in the dental analysis category, with hypodontia ranked as the worst smile feature (mean numeric rating scale score 4.71).ConclusionAmong dental students, the most distracting characteristics of a smile when determining its attractiveness were hypodontia, gingival smile, a reversed curvature of the occlusal plane, and dental crowding.

Oral health related quality of life and self-esteem in a general population

“…In one study, female subjects reported the perception of a more altered OHRQoL, compared to male subjects [38]. Similar with the current study, in respect to the dental aesthetics, a more critical approach for the female subjects was reported, but with the usage of another selfreporting instrument [39]. In other studies, female subjects tended to be more critical in the evaluation of the smile and dental aspects [39], dental color [40] or when answering combined dental aesthetics and OHRQoL questionnaires [41].…”

“…Similar with the current study, in respect to the dental aesthetics, a more critical approach for the female subjects was reported, but with the usage of another selfreporting instrument [39]. In other studies, female subjects tended to be more critical in the evaluation of the smile and dental aspects [39], dental color [40] or when answering combined dental aesthetics and OHRQoL questionnaires [41]. In contrast to the present study, other research protocols indicate no gender-related statistically significant OHRQoL perception differences, using different forms of the OHIP questionnaire [42].…”

Dentofacial mini- and microesthetics as perceived by dental students: A cross-sectional multi-site study

“…As mentioned before, Brisman [7], working in the New York area, found no gender effect. In contrast, Armalaite [12], studying a larger sample of Lithuanian dental students, found a definite and significant difference between males and females in the evaluation of a number of dental esthetic features from gingival smile through dental crowding. They drew the conclusion that women were "more critical" regarding these features.…”

“…A specific question that has been investigated in several studies since the 1980s is whether dental education (the process of becoming a professional) has a significant effect on one's perception of dental esthetics [7][8][9][10][11][12].…”

“…While the methodologies and sample sizes of earlier studies dealing with the esthetic perception of dental students were mostly proper, no study has ever considered all grades of the dental school comprehensively. Armalaite and colleagues studied only 4 th -and 5 th -year students [12], the student sample of Tufekci and colleagues consisted of 1 st -and 3 rd -year students, while other studies did not even differentiate between grades, they treated dental students as a homogeneous group instead.…”