Advertisement

A new instrument to clinically evaluate the anteroposterior relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead

Published:August 05, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejwf.2022.07.001

      Highlights

      • An evaluation of the reliability of a new instrument to measure the anteroposterior relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead.
      • Good to excellent intra- and inter-examiner agreement were found.
      • The pre-designed transparent template showed good to excellent reliability for determining the anteroposterior relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead.
      • This new instrument can help orthodontists and maxillofacial surgeons clinically evaluate the position of the maxillary incisors, and indirectly the maxilla, in the sagittal plane.

      ABSTRACT

      Background

      To evaluate the reliability of a new instrument to clinically measure the anteroposterior relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead.

      Methods

      An analytical cross-sectional study using a sample of 84 (67% female and 33% male) young adult participants was conducted. Measurements were performed according to Element II of the Andrews’ Six Elements of Orofacial Harmony by assessing the horizontal distance between the facial axis point of the maxillary central incisor and the forehead's anterior limit line. The instrument tested was a transparent plastic template having a leveling meter, reference lines, and an embedded millimeter ruler. Two orthodontists evaluated the sample twice with a minimum of a two-week interval between evaluations. The reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Repeated-measures ANOVA was also performed.

      Results

      Good to excellent intra- and interexaminer agreement, with intraclass correlation coefficient values of 0.874 (95% confidence interval 0.800–0.921; P < 0.001) and 0.876 (95% confidence interval 0.739–0.948; P < 0.001), respectively, were calculated. There were no statistically significant differences between all the repeated measurements assessed (P = 0.820).

      Conclusions

      The instrument showed good to excellent reliability for determining the anteroposterior relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead and could be used to help orthodontists and maxillofacial surgeons indirectly evaluate the anteroposterior position of the maxilla.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Andrews WA.
        AP relationship of the maxillary central incisors to the forehead in adult white females.
        Angle Orthod. 2008; 78: 662-669
        • Deli R
        • Galantucci LM
        • Laino A
        • D’Alessio R
        • Di Gioia E
        • Savastano C
        • et al.
        Three-dimensional methodology for photogrammetric acquisition of the soft tissues of the face: a new clinical instrumental protocol.
        Prog Orthod. 2013; 14: 32
        • Iared W
        • Koga EM
        • Iared W
        • Rufino C.
        Esthetic perception of changes in facial profile resulting from orthodontic treatment with extraction of premolars: a systematic review.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 2017; 148: 9-16
        • Nanda V
        • Gutman B
        • Bar E
        • Alghamdi S
        • Tetradis S
        • Lusis AJ
        • et al.
        Quantitative analysis of 3-dimensional facial soft tissue photographic images: technical methods and clinical application.
        Prog Orthod. 2015; 16: 21
        • Pham M
        • Wang Y
        • Wang W
        • Zhou C
        • Guo C
        • Bao B.
        [Perception of facial profile attractiveness oflower anterior face height in orthodontic treatment seeking people].
        Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2013; 31: 385-388
        • Maetevorakul S
        • Viteporn S.
        Factors influencing soft tissue profile changes following orthodontic treatment in patients with class II division 1 malocclusion.
        Prog Orthod. 2016; 17: 13
        • Mann KR
        • Marshall SD
        • Qian F
        • Southard KA
        • Southard TE.
        Effect of maxillary anteroposterior position on profile esthetics in headgear-treated patients.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011; 139: 228-234
        • Morar A
        • Stein E.
        A method of assessing facial profile attractiveness and its application incomparing the aesthetic preferences of two samples of South Africans.
        J Orthod. 2011; 38: 99-106
        • Schlosser JB
        • Preston CB
        • Lampasso J.
        The effects of computer-aided anteroposterior maxillary incisor movement on ratings of facial attractiveness.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2005; 127: 17
        • Bergman RT.
        Cephalometric soft tissue facial analysis.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1999; 116: 373-389
        • Tulloch C
        • Phillips C
        • Dann C.
        Cephalometric measures as indicators of facial attractiveness.
        Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 1993; 8: 171-179
      1. Andrews LF. The six elements of orofacial harmony. Available from: http://www.pointlomaorthodontics.com/common/pages/UserFile.aspx?fileId=955029#:∼:text=The%20Six%20Elements%E2%84%A2%20serve,%2C%202)%20AP%20jaw%20positions%2C. [Accessed July 21, 2020].

        • Andrews LF
        • Andrews WA.
        Element II: jaws-AP.
        Andrews J Orthod Orofac Harmony. 2000; 1: iii
        • Andrews LF.
        Six element diagnostic record.
        Andrews J Orthod Orofac Harmony. 2001; 2: 15
        • Andrews LF.
        The 6-elements orthodontic philosophy: Treatment goals, classification, and rules for treating.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2015; 148: 883-887
        • Andrews LF.
        Straight wire: the concept and appliance.
        La Wells Comp, San Diego, CA1989
        • Cuccia AM
        • Caradonna C.
        The natural head position. Different techniques of head positioning in the study of craniocervical posture.
        Minerva Stomatol. 2009; 58: 601-612
        • Dahlberg G.
        Statistical methods for medical and biological students.
        Br Med J. 1940; 2: 358-359
        • Damstra J
        • Slater JJRH
        • Fourie Z
        • Ren Y.
        Reliability and the smallest detectable differences of lateral cephalometric measurements.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010; 138 (e1–8): 546
        • Eddo M-L
        • El Hayeck É
        • Hoyeck M
        • Khoury É
        • Ghoubril J.
        [Natural head position’s reproducibility on photographs].
        Orthod Fr. 2017; 88: 377-382
        • Koo TK
        • Li MY.
        A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research.
        J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15: 155-163
        • Cançado RH
        • Lauris JRP.
        Error of the method: what is it for?.
        Dent Press J Orthod. 2014; 19: 25
        • Vilanova L
        • Henriques JFC
        • Janson G
        • Patel MP
        • Reis RS
        • Aliaga-Del Castillo A.
        Class II malocclusion treatment effects with Jones Jig and Distal Jet followed by fixed appliances.
        Angle Orthod. 2018; 88: 10-19
        • Adarsh K
        • Sharma P
        • Juneja A.
        Accuracy and reliability of tooth length measurements onconventional and CBCT images: an in vitro comparative study.
        J Orthod Sci. 2018; 7: 17
        • Gül N
        • Karsli E
        • Kurt G
        Comparison of dental measurements between conventional plaster models, digital models obtained by impression scanning and plaster model scanning.
        Int Orthod. 2019; 17: 151-158
        • Negi G
        • Chitra P.
        Photogrammetric reliability of frontal facial photographs with radiographs and anthropometric measurements.
        J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2019; 9: 280-285
        • Dong T
        • Ye N
        • Yuan L
        • Wu S
        • Xia L
        • Fang B.
        Assessing the influence of chin asymmetry on perceived facial esthetics with 3-dimensional images.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 78: 1389-1396
        • Ferreira JB
        • Silva LE
        • Caetano MTO
        • Motta AFJ
        • Cury-Saramago AA
        • Mucha JN.
        Perception of midline deviations in smile esthetics by laypersons.
        Dental Press J Orthod. 2016; 21: 51
        • Jiang Z
        • Tan L
        • Hu L
        • Wang C
        • Wang H
        • Xie Z.
        Clinician, dental student, and orthognathic patient perception of black-and-white silhouette lateral profile dimensions of ideal chin position in a Chinese population.
        Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018; 125: e1-e7
        • Farronato G
        • Galbiati G
        • Esposito L
        • Mortellaro C
        • Zanoni F
        • Maspero C.
        Three-dimensional virtual treatment planning: presurgical evaluation.
        J Craniofac Surg. 2018; 29: e433-e437
        • Lin S-W
        • Sutherland K
        • Liao Y-F
        • Cistulli PA
        • Chuang L-P
        • Chou Y-T
        • et al.
        Three-dimensional photography for the evaluation of facial profiles in obstructive sleep apnoea.
        Respirology. 2018; 23: 618-625
        • Manosudprasit A
        • Haghi A
        • Allareddy V
        • Masoud MI.
        Diagnosis and treatment planning of orthodontic patients with 3-dimensional dentofacial records.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2017; 151: 1083-1091
        • Shahen S
        • Lagravère MO
        • Carrino G
        • Fahim F
        • Abdelsalam R
        • Flores-Mir C
        • et al.
        United Reference Method for three-dimensional treatment evaluation.
        Prog Orthod. 2018; 19: 47
        • Carruitero MJ
        • Ambrosio-Vallejos XM
        • Flores-Mir C.
        Glabellar vertical line as a reference goal for anteroposterior maxillary position.
        Dent Press J Orthod. 2019; 24 (e1–5): 45