Change in frequency of the maxillary midline diastema appearing in photographs of Caucasian females in two fashion magazines from 2003 to 2012

Smile Attractiveness and Treatment Needs of Maxillary Midline Diastema with Various Widths: Perception among Laypersons, Dental Students, and Dentists in Malaysia

Smile attractiveness and the need for treatment of maxillary midline diastema with various widths are perceived differently between dentally trained and nondentally trained individuals of different sociodemographic backgrounds. This study aims to evaluate how laypersons, dental students, and dentists in Malaysia differ in their perceptions on smile attractiveness and treatment needs of maxillary midline diastema. A smiling photograph with well-aligned maxillary central incisors with proportionate width-to-height ratio and healthy gingival tissues was selected and digitally manipulated to create maxillary midline diastema with 0.5, 2.0, and 4.0 mm widths. The smile attractiveness and the perceived need for treatment of varying widths of maxillary midline diastemas were rated by laypersons, dental students, and dentists using the Likert scale via a single set of self-administered questionnaires. The impact of sociodemographic variables on aesthetic perception of different gap widths was tested using univariate analysis followed by a multiple linear regression model. A total of 158 laypersons, 118 dental students, and 138 dentists participated in this study. Both laypersons and dentists showed significantly higher mean aesthetic scores for 0.5 mm maxillary midline diastema, lower mean aesthetic scores, and hence higher mean treatment needs scores for 4.0 mm maxillary midline diastema as compared with dental students (p < 0.05). In general, female respondents perceived a gap width of up to 2.0 mm as aesthetically pleasing. Higher educational group and the Malay ethnicity had tolerance threshold of 0.5 mm gap width. The older group considered 4.0 mm gap width as aesthetically unpleasing. In conclusion, both laypersons and dentists accepted a 0.5 mm maxillary midline diastema as an attractive smile but considered 4.0 mm maxillary midline diastema as unpleasing smile which required treatment. Perceptions of laypersons and dentists were significantly different from dental students. Educational level, gender, ethnicity, and age were significantly associated with smile attractiveness of maxillary midline diastema at different investigated widths.

Does the presence of maxillary midline diastema influence the perception of dentofacial esthetics in video analysis?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of a midline diastema on dentofacial esthetic perceptions of orthodontists, restorative dental specialists or prosthodontists, and laypersons in a frontal facial evaluation performed by means of video.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two individuals aged between 20 and 25 years, one of each gender, with presence of a midline diastema were selected. An acrylic resin mockup was made of the maxillary anterior region, simulating ideal conditions of smile esthetics. Four standardized frontal view videos of the complete face were filmed of each individual in the following situations: with the ideal smile (unchanged mockup) and with the presence of midline diastemas of 0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mm created by the mockup. In all videos, the patient said a certain sentence and, at the end, simulated a posed smile. Dentofacial esthetic perceptions of all four videos of each individual were evaluated by 51 orthodontists, 51 restorative dental specialists or prosthodontists, and 51 laypersons by means of visual analog scales. Data were evaluated using analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc test, with the level of significance set at 5%.

RESULTS

The most attractive videos for all groups of examiners were those without diastema and with a diastema of 0.5 mm, for both the woman and the man. For a diastema of 1 mm or 1.5 mm, the dentofacial characteristics were considered unesthetic.

CONCLUSIONS

Diastemas equal to or greater than 1 mm negatively influence dentofacial esthetics in a frontal facial evaluation performed by means of video.

Long-term bonded retention after closure of maxillary midline diastema

INTRODUCTION

The objectives of this study were to evaluate fixed bonded palatal surface retainers between the maxillary central incisors that were placed to maintain midline diastema closure and record their longevity, proclivity for damage, and periodontal health of the central incisors in patients 5 or more years after treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-nine subjects were contacted and interviewed by phone concerning the status of their bonded retainer and midline diastema. Eleven subjects with intact retainers came for a periodontal health evaluation of the maxillary central incisors. The measures used were the plaque index, the periodontal screening and recording score, and the gingival index. A split-mouth design was used. Statistical analyses of retainer duration, damage probability, and gingival health were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 29 subjects, 52% of the initial retainers were in place for an average of 23 years. For the total of 34 bonded retainers, the mean longevity was 17 years. The risk of breakage for any particular year the retainer was in place was 2%. The mean differences in scores between the maxillary central incisors and the control teeth were -0.06 for the plaque index, -0.14 for the periodontal screening and recording score, and -0.11 for the gingival index. Statistical tests on the differences indicated no evidence that the long-term presence of the bonded palatal surface retainer adversely affected the periodontal health of the maxillary central incisors.

CONCLUSIONS

The study's sample demonstrated that a bonded retainer for maintaining closure of a maxillary midline diastema can last an average of 17 years or more, with a yearly 2% chance of breakage and with no expected adverse effects on the periodontal health of the maxillary central incisors.