Relationship between maxillary central incisor proportions and facial proportions

Sapna Radia; Martyn Sherriff; Fraser McDonald; Farhad B. Naini

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019

Relationship between maxillary central incisor proportions and facial proportions

Sapna Radia, Martyn Sherriff, Fraser McDonald, Farhad B. Naini

King's College London

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

17 Citations (Scopus)

623 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Statement of problem No universally accepted parameter exists for selecting maxillary central incisors (MCIs) relative to facial proportions. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between MCIs and facial height and width in adults, intersex differences, and measurement differences between right and left MCI. Material and methods A prospective study was undertaken of 149 dental students (F:76; M:73) aged between 18 and 30 years. Anthropometric MCI and horizontal and vertical facial measurements were recorded with digital calipers by 1 operator. Correlation was investigated with Pearson correlation coefficients (α=.05). Two-sample t tests were used for intersex comparisons and paired t tests to compare right and left MCIs. Intraexaminer reliability was tested by remeasuring 25 participants and applying the Bland-Altman and Lin analyses. Results The mean MCI height was 10.28 mm (right and left) and the mean widths were 8.65 mm (right) and 8.66 mm (left). Intersex incisor differences existed for height measurements (M:F 0.54 mm [right], 0.46 mm [left]) and width measurements (M:F 0.26 mm) but not for width-to-height ratios (F=0.85; M=0.84). A mean ratio of 15.56 was found between bizygomatic width:tooth width (M=15.75, F=15.37) and of 17.93 between total face height:MCI height (M=17.97, F=17.89). Correlation coefficients were low for all tooth:face measurements. Intraexaminer reliability was clinically acceptable. Conclusions Men had larger teeth and faces but similar width:height ratios. There was no significant size difference between right and left MCI, little individual relationship between tooth:face proportions, and insignificant sex influence. The “biometric ratio”’ of 1:16 for MCI:bizygomatic width was not reconfirmed exactly. A ratio of 1:18 is proposed for MCI height to total face height (Tr-Me’) and 1:12 for face height (N’-Me’).

Original language	English
Journal	Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 13 Jan 2016

Access to Document

10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019

JPD Incisor proportionsAccepted author manuscript, 65.2 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{8704ab15c8f5422c9e3034c6e233aff1,

title = "Relationship between maxillary central incisor proportions and facial proportions",

abstract = "Statement of problem No universally accepted parameter exists for selecting maxillary central incisors (MCIs) relative to facial proportions. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between MCIs and facial height and width in adults, intersex differences, and measurement differences between right and left MCI. Material and methods A prospective study was undertaken of 149 dental students (F:76; M:73) aged between 18 and 30 years. Anthropometric MCI and horizontal and vertical facial measurements were recorded with digital calipers by 1 operator. Correlation was investigated with Pearson correlation coefficients (α=.05). Two-sample t tests were used for intersex comparisons and paired t tests to compare right and left MCIs. Intraexaminer reliability was tested by remeasuring 25 participants and applying the Bland-Altman and Lin analyses. Results The mean MCI height was 10.28 mm (right and left) and the mean widths were 8.65 mm (right) and 8.66 mm (left). Intersex incisor differences existed for height measurements (M:F 0.54 mm [right], 0.46 mm [left]) and width measurements (M:F 0.26 mm) but not for width-to-height ratios (F=0.85; M=0.84). A mean ratio of 15.56 was found between bizygomatic width:tooth width (M=15.75, F=15.37) and of 17.93 between total face height:MCI height (M=17.97, F=17.89). Correlation coefficients were low for all tooth:face measurements. Intraexaminer reliability was clinically acceptable. Conclusions Men had larger teeth and faces but similar width:height ratios. There was no significant size difference between right and left MCI, little individual relationship between tooth:face proportions, and insignificant sex influence. The “biometric ratio”{\textquoteright} of 1:16 for MCI:bizygomatic width was not reconfirmed exactly. A ratio of 1:18 is proposed for MCI height to total face height (Tr-Me{\textquoteright}) and 1:12 for face height (N{\textquoteright}-Me{\textquoteright}).",

author = "Sapna Radia and Martyn Sherriff and Fraser McDonald and Naini, {Farhad B.}",

year = "2016",

month = jan,

day = "13",

doi = "10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019",

language = "English",

journal = "Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry",

issn = "0022-3913",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relationship between maxillary central incisor proportions and facial proportions

AU - Radia, Sapna

AU - Sherriff, Martyn

AU - McDonald, Fraser

AU - Naini, Farhad B.

PY - 2016/1/13

Y1 - 2016/1/13

N2 - Statement of problem No universally accepted parameter exists for selecting maxillary central incisors (MCIs) relative to facial proportions. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between MCIs and facial height and width in adults, intersex differences, and measurement differences between right and left MCI. Material and methods A prospective study was undertaken of 149 dental students (F:76; M:73) aged between 18 and 30 years. Anthropometric MCI and horizontal and vertical facial measurements were recorded with digital calipers by 1 operator. Correlation was investigated with Pearson correlation coefficients (α=.05). Two-sample t tests were used for intersex comparisons and paired t tests to compare right and left MCIs. Intraexaminer reliability was tested by remeasuring 25 participants and applying the Bland-Altman and Lin analyses. Results The mean MCI height was 10.28 mm (right and left) and the mean widths were 8.65 mm (right) and 8.66 mm (left). Intersex incisor differences existed for height measurements (M:F 0.54 mm [right], 0.46 mm [left]) and width measurements (M:F 0.26 mm) but not for width-to-height ratios (F=0.85; M=0.84). A mean ratio of 15.56 was found between bizygomatic width:tooth width (M=15.75, F=15.37) and of 17.93 between total face height:MCI height (M=17.97, F=17.89). Correlation coefficients were low for all tooth:face measurements. Intraexaminer reliability was clinically acceptable. Conclusions Men had larger teeth and faces but similar width:height ratios. There was no significant size difference between right and left MCI, little individual relationship between tooth:face proportions, and insignificant sex influence. The “biometric ratio”’ of 1:16 for MCI:bizygomatic width was not reconfirmed exactly. A ratio of 1:18 is proposed for MCI height to total face height (Tr-Me’) and 1:12 for face height (N’-Me’).

AB - Statement of problem No universally accepted parameter exists for selecting maxillary central incisors (MCIs) relative to facial proportions. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between MCIs and facial height and width in adults, intersex differences, and measurement differences between right and left MCI. Material and methods A prospective study was undertaken of 149 dental students (F:76; M:73) aged between 18 and 30 years. Anthropometric MCI and horizontal and vertical facial measurements were recorded with digital calipers by 1 operator. Correlation was investigated with Pearson correlation coefficients (α=.05). Two-sample t tests were used for intersex comparisons and paired t tests to compare right and left MCIs. Intraexaminer reliability was tested by remeasuring 25 participants and applying the Bland-Altman and Lin analyses. Results The mean MCI height was 10.28 mm (right and left) and the mean widths were 8.65 mm (right) and 8.66 mm (left). Intersex incisor differences existed for height measurements (M:F 0.54 mm [right], 0.46 mm [left]) and width measurements (M:F 0.26 mm) but not for width-to-height ratios (F=0.85; M=0.84). A mean ratio of 15.56 was found between bizygomatic width:tooth width (M=15.75, F=15.37) and of 17.93 between total face height:MCI height (M=17.97, F=17.89). Correlation coefficients were low for all tooth:face measurements. Intraexaminer reliability was clinically acceptable. Conclusions Men had larger teeth and faces but similar width:height ratios. There was no significant size difference between right and left MCI, little individual relationship between tooth:face proportions, and insignificant sex influence. The “biometric ratio”’ of 1:16 for MCI:bizygomatic width was not reconfirmed exactly. A ratio of 1:18 is proposed for MCI height to total face height (Tr-Me’) and 1:12 for face height (N’-Me’).

U2 - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019

DO - 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.019

M3 - Article

SN - 0022-3913

JO - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

JF - Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

ER -

Relationship between maxillary central incisor proportions and facial proportions

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this