IADR Abstract Archives
Study of the Soft Tissue Profile of an African Population
Objectives: Orthodontic treatments reflect the aesthetic, facial and cephalometric, standards. Are these standards applicable to all populations?
The aim of this study was to determine aesthetic standards of adults in Burkina Faso, and compare the results to the most used orthodontic criteria.
Methods: Various measurements have been done on profile photographs of 80 individuals from Burkina Faso with normoclusion, complete dental formula and without orthodontic antecedents. For each individual, a profile photograph of the head in natural posture was taken and soft tissue landmarks were used to calculate angular measurements. The sample included 40 females and 40 males, with an average age of 21.62 years. The results were compared to orthodontic averages and gender differences were statistically analysed using Student t-test (p = 0.05).
Results: Compared to orthodontic references, the Burkinabe has closed nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity. The nasofrontal, nasal tip, nasolabial and mentolabial angles are more open in female adults. There are no significant gender differences regarding nasolabial angle, nasal depth angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity.
Conclusions: Orthodontic standards are not applicable to all populations. Adults in Burkina Faso have closed nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity in comparison with those of Caucasian. Our study may contribute to the improvement of the ethnic tissue profile morphological approach during orthodontic treatment.
The aim of this study was to determine aesthetic standards of adults in Burkina Faso, and compare the results to the most used orthodontic criteria.
Methods: Various measurements have been done on profile photographs of 80 individuals from Burkina Faso with normoclusion, complete dental formula and without orthodontic antecedents. For each individual, a profile photograph of the head in natural posture was taken and soft tissue landmarks were used to calculate angular measurements. The sample included 40 females and 40 males, with an average age of 21.62 years. The results were compared to orthodontic averages and gender differences were statistically analysed using Student t-test (p = 0.05).
Results: Compared to orthodontic references, the Burkinabe has closed nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity. The nasofrontal, nasal tip, nasolabial and mentolabial angles are more open in female adults. There are no significant gender differences regarding nasolabial angle, nasal depth angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity.
Conclusions: Orthodontic standards are not applicable to all populations. Adults in Burkina Faso have closed nasofrontal angle, nasolabial angle and angles of facial and total facial convexity in comparison with those of Caucasian. Our study may contribute to the improvement of the ethnic tissue profile morphological approach during orthodontic treatment.