Perception of Altered Smile Esthetics by Orthodontists, General Dentists, and Laypeople

Authors

  • Ozra Niknam Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
  • Shole Shahi Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
  • Jale Narimisaei Department of Computer, Energy and Data science Faculty, Behbahan Khatam Alanbia University of Technology, Behbahan, Iran
  • Mohabbat Mousaei Emami Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.vi.3947

Keywords:

Smiling; Esthetics; Dental; Dentists; Orthodontists

Abstract

Background: Considering the significance of creation of a consonant smile arc and gap of information on the role of smile arc, gingival margin position, and the golden ratio in smile esthetics, this study assessed the perception of laypeople, general dentists, and orthodontists from altered smile esthetics. Materials and Methods: This descriptive study was conducted in 2019 with three rater groups: orthodontists (n=31), general dentists (n=49), and laypeople (n=61). A standardized frontal-view smile photograph of a female subject was digitally altered using Photoshop (version 19) to create images differing in (a) gingival margin position (four variations), (b) golden ratio (62%, 70%, and 80%), and (c) smile arc curvature (five variations). Raters, blinded to the alterations, evaluated each image’s attractiveness using a 10-point Likert scale. Due to non-normal data distribution, Kruskal–Wallis, Mann–Whitney, and Friedman tests were used for analysis (α=0.05). Results: The highest overall attractiveness ratings were given to the image with equal gingival margins for central and lateral incisors (M=7.16 ± 2.04), followed by the lateral margins 1 mm below the centrals (M=7.04 ± 2.01). Wider golden ratios (80%) were rated more attractive across all groups. Laypeople rated flat and reverse smile arcs significantly higher than general dentists and orthodontists (P<.05). No significant gender-based differences were observed in any category. Conclusion: The three rater groups had the same opinion regarding the smile attractiveness of most altered images except for the reverse smile arc, which was only favored by the laypeople.

References

Mora MG, Serna MEV, Ledesma AF. Perception of smile aesthetics by dental specialists and patients. Rev Mex Ortod. 2016;3(1):1321.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmo.2016.03.006

Ahrari F, Heravi F, Rashed R, Zarrabi MJ, Setayesh Y. Which Factors Affect Dental Esthetics and Smile Attractiveness in Orthodontically Treated Patients? J Dent (Tehran). 2015;12(7):491503.

https://doi.org/10.4103/2349-5243.192526

Cotrim ER, Vasconcelos Júnior ÁV, Haddad ACSS, Reis SAB. Perception of adults' smile esthetics among orthodontists, clinicians and laypeople. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015;20:404.

https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.20.1.040-044.oar

PMid:25741823 PMCid:PMC4373014

Ayyıldız E, Tan E, Celebi AA, Keklik H, Pithon MM. Evaluation of black spaces between maxillary central incisors by dentistry students and laypeople. J Oral Sci. 2017;59(3):32328.

https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.16-0478

PMid:28904309

Motta AFJ da, Silva LE da, Ferreira JB, Caetano MT de O, CurySaramago A de A, Mucha JN. Perception of midline deviations in smile esthetics by laypersons. Dental Press J Orthod. 2017;21(6):517.

https://doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.21.6.051-057.oar

PMid:28125140 PMCid:PMC5278933

Najafi HZ, Oshagh M, Azizi M. Esthetic effect of the buccal corridor size and amount of toothgingival display on smile attractiveness in two student population. Journal of Dental Medicine. 2015;28(1):5767.

Appukuttan D, Cholan PK, Ashwini CR, Swapna S. Assessment of gingival zenith position and distance from vertical bisecting midline in the maxillary anterior dentition− An observational study. J Orofac Sci. 2018;10(1):148.

https://doi.org/10.4103/jofs.jofs_32_17

Dindaroglu F, Ertan Erdinc AM, Dogan S. Perception of Smile Esthetics by Orthodontists and Laypersons: Full Face and A Localized View of The Social and Spontaneous Smiles. Turkish J Orthod. 2017;29:5968

https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2016.0013

PMid:30112476 PMCid:PMC6007622

Saffarpour A, Ghavam M, Saffarpour A, Dayani R, Fard MJK. Perception of Laypeople and Dental Professionals of Smile Esthetics. J Dent (Tehran). 2016;13:8591.

Musskopf ML, Rocha JM, Rösing CK. Perception of smile esthetics varies between patients and dental professionals when recession defects are present. Braz Dent J. 2013;24(4):38590.

https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201302223

PMid:24173262

Olivares A, Vicente A, Jacobo C, Molina SM, Rodríguez A, Bravo LA. Canting of the occlusal plane: Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2013;18:e51620.

https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.18335

PMid:23524412 PMCid:PMC3668882

Ahrari F, Heravi F, Rashed R, Zarrabi MJ, Setayesh Y. Which factors affect dental esthetics and smile attractiveness in orthodontically treated patients? J Dent (Tehran, Iran). 2015;12(7):491503.

https://doi.org/10.4103/2349-5243.192526

Oz AA, Akdeniz BS, Canli E, Celik S. Smile Attractiveness: Differences among the Perceptions of Dental Professionals and Laypersons. Turkish J Orthod. 2017;30(2):505.

https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2017.17021

PMid:30112492 PMCid:PMC6007756

Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM, Ackerman JL. Contemporary orthodontics. 5th ed: St Louis (MO) Mosby Elsevier; 2013.

Oz AA, Akdeniz BS, Canli E, Celik S. Smile attractiveness: differences among the perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons. Turk J Orthod. 2017;30(2):50-5.

https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2017.17021

PMid:30112492 PMCid:PMC6007756

Niknam O, Yousefi Hafshejani S, Rakhshan V. Attractive combinations of female gingival displays, buccal corridor sizes, and facial heights according to orthodontists, dentists, and laypeople of different ages and sexes: a psychometric study. Head Face Med. 2024;20(1):17.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-024-00417-1

PMid:38459597 PMCid:PMC10921605

Sriphadungporn C, Chamnannidiadha N. Perception of smile esthetics by laypeople of different ages. Progress in orthodontics. 2017 Mar 20;18(1):8.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-017-0162-4

PMid:28317085 PMCid:PMC5357618

Talic N, Alomar S, Almaidhan A. Perception of Saudi dentists and lay people to altered smile esthetics. Saudi Dent J. 2013;25(1):1321.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2012.09.001

PMid:23960550 PMCid:PMC3723121

CracelNogueira F, Pinho T. Assessment of the perception of smile esthetics by laypersons, dental students and dental practitioners. Int Orthod. 2013;11:43244.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2013.09.007

PMid:24427802

Saha MK, Khatri M, Saha SG, Dubey S, Saxena D, Vijaywargiya N. Perception of acceptable range of smiles by specialists, general dentists and lay persons and evaluation of different aesthetic paradigms. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11:zc258.

https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/23359.9274

PMid:28384975 PMCid:PMC5376908

Almanea R, Modimigh A, Almogren F, Alhazzani E. Perception of smile attractiveness among orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons in Saudi Arabia. J Conserv Dent. 2019;22(1):6975.

Parekh SM, Fields HW, Beck M, Rosenstiel S. Attractiveness of variations in the smile arc and buccal corridor space as judged by orthodontists and laymen. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):55763.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-08

How to Cite

Niknam, O., Shahi, S., Narimisaei, J., & Mousaei Emami, M. (2025). Perception of Altered Smile Esthetics by Orthodontists, General Dentists, and Laypeople. Galen Medical Journal, 14(SP1), e3947. https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.vi.3947