Aesthetic Preferences for Replacement of Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisors: A Comparison of Canine Substitution, Implants and Resin-Bonded Bridges Among Australian Dental Professionals and Laypeople.

IF 1.9 4区医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Australian dental journal Pub Date : 2025-06-03 DOI:10.1111/adj.13080

Jason Guo, John M Razza, Richard J H Lee, Steven Naoum, Mithran S Goonewardene

{"title":"Aesthetic Preferences for Replacement of Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisors: A Comparison of Canine Substitution, Implants and Resin-Bonded Bridges Among Australian Dental Professionals and Laypeople.","authors":"Jason Guo, John M Razza, Richard J H Lee, Steven Naoum, Mithran S Goonewardene","doi":"10.1111/adj.13080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Aesthetic outcomes of treatment options for missing maxillary lateral incisors significantly influence patient satisfaction. This study compared aesthetic treatment outcome preferences for canine substitution, resin-bonded bridges and implants among Australian orthodontists, prosthodontists, general dentists and laypeople.Methods: A cross-sectional online survey assessed attractiveness ratings and preferences using a ranking system and a Likert scale. One-way and two-way ANOVA examined differences by respondent group and treatment type.Results: Among 547 respondents (orthodontists: 117, prosthodontists: 56, general dentists: 167, laypeople: 207), significant differences were found in aesthetic ratings (p < 0.001). Canine substitution was rated most attractive (mean rank = 1.43), followed by resin-bonded bridges (1.78), while implants (2.81) and no treatment (3.99) were rated lower. Two-way ANOVA showed significant main effects of treatment type and respondent group (p < 0.001), with an interaction effect indicating varied preferences among groups.Conclusions: Canine substitution was the preferred treatment outcome aesthetically, particularly among orthodontists. Resin-bonded bridges were also favoured. These findings highlight the impact of professional background on aesthetic preferences and emphasise the need for patient-centred treatment planning.","PeriodicalId":8593,"journal":{"name":"Australian dental journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.13080","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Aesthetic outcomes of treatment options for missing maxillary lateral incisors significantly influence patient satisfaction. This study compared aesthetic treatment outcome preferences for canine substitution, resin-bonded bridges and implants among Australian orthodontists, prosthodontists, general dentists and laypeople.

Methods: A cross-sectional online survey assessed attractiveness ratings and preferences using a ranking system and a Likert scale. One-way and two-way ANOVA examined differences by respondent group and treatment type.

Results: Among 547 respondents (orthodontists: 117, prosthodontists: 56, general dentists: 167, laypeople: 207), significant differences were found in aesthetic ratings (p < 0.001). Canine substitution was rated most attractive (mean rank = 1.43), followed by resin-bonded bridges (1.78), while implants (2.81) and no treatment (3.99) were rated lower. Two-way ANOVA showed significant main effects of treatment type and respondent group (p < 0.001), with an interaction effect indicating varied preferences among groups.

Conclusions: Canine substitution was the preferred treatment outcome aesthetically, particularly among orthodontists. Resin-bonded bridges were also favoured. These findings highlight the impact of professional background on aesthetic preferences and emphasise the need for patient-centred treatment planning.

查看原文本刊更多论文

上颌侧门牙缺失的审美偏好：澳大利亚牙科专业人员和外行人对犬齿替代、种植体和树脂桥的比较。

背景：上颌侧切牙缺失治疗方案的美学效果显著影响患者满意度。本研究比较了澳大利亚正畸医生、修复医生、普通牙医和外行人对犬科替代、树脂桥和种植体的审美治疗结果的偏好。方法：横断面在线调查评估吸引力评级和偏好使用排名系统和李克特量表。单因素和双因素方差分析检验了被调查者组和治疗类型的差异。结果：547名调查对象（正畸医生117名，修复医生56名，普通牙医167名，非专业医生207名）在美学评分上存在显著差异(p)。结论：犬科替代是首选的美学治疗结果，尤其是在正畸医生中。树脂桥也受到青睐。这些发现突出了专业背景对审美偏好的影响，并强调了以患者为中心的治疗计划的必要性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Australian dental journal 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

4.80%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Australian Dental Journal provides a forum for the exchange of information about new and significant research in dentistry, promoting the discipline of dentistry in Australia and throughout the world. It comprises peer-reviewed research articles as its core material, supplemented by reviews, theoretical articles, special features and commentaries.