- 期刊
The Preferred Anterior Crown-Mucogingival Profile of Young People of Chinese Ethnicity in Singapore
新加坡年輕華人族群上顎前牙區牙冠及牙齦關係之美觀評估
摘要
研究背景：上顎前牙區美觀取決於牙冠與牙齦形態的協調。本研究藉由量測新加坡年輕華人上顎前牙區牙冠與牙齦形態指標及美觀性評估，以期能建立上顎前牙美觀區手術及膺復重建之參考。研究方法：使用自製電腦軟體之定位，對23位牙醫系學生上顎前牙區的牙冠級牙齦形態指標，包括牙冠尺寸及寬度比例、牙冠軸向角度、牙齦乳突高度、以及對稱，由受測者本人、牙醫系新生、及牙周病、膺復補綴、及矯正專科醫師進行美觀之評量。研究結果：各組偏好的牙冠及牙齦量測指標大致無組間明顯差異，其中牙冠尺寸之對稱在各組均得到重視，特別是牙醫系新生及矯正專科醫師組別。在偏好的牙冠牙齦型態中，側門齒及犬齒之牙齦高點（gingival zenith）相對正中門齒之落差在受試者本人及牙醫系新生組別中較小，矯正專科醫師偏好之牙齦高點落差又較其他兩專科小。牙醫師及受試者本人偏好較對稱及偏高的牙齦乳突，而在牙醫師中牙周病專科醫師偏好較低的乳突高度。結論：各組群偏好之前牙牙冠與牙齦型態存在極微小差異，其中所有族群均偏好對稱之牙齒尺寸，而牙醫師相對其他族群更為重視牙冠軸向及明顯的牙齦高點位差。因此，治療前詳細的評估和溝通對於上顎前牙美觀區實屬必須。
並列摘要
Background: The aesthetics of anterior maxillary crowns relies on a harmonious crownmucogingival relationship. This study's aim was to develop guidelines for the aesthetic prosthetic and surgical reconstruction of the anterior maxillary teeth by investigating the preferred anterior crownmucogingival profiles of young people of Chinese ethnicity in Singapore. Methods: Twenty-three dental students were recruited to this study. To present the crownmucogingival profile of the anterior maxillary teeth, various parameters, consisting of tooth dimensions, relative proportions and percentages, the positions of the gingival zenith points (GZPs), papilla height (PH) and angles of gingival line, incisal ridge, and long axis, as well as the symmetry of these parameters, were assessed. Aesthetic preference was judged by the subjects themselves, who were the junior dental (D1) students and dentists from the disciplines of prosthodontics, periodontics, and orthodontics. Results: Generally, no obvious difference was noted with regard to the preferred profiles among the reviewer groups and all groups preferred symmetrical tooth dimensions, especially the D1 student and orthodontists groups. A preference for a smaller gingival line angle (GLA) was found among the self-perception and D1 student groups relative to the dental professionals; furthermore orthodontists preferred a smaller GLA than the other disciplines. The dental professional and self-perception groups preferred a more symmetrical and coronal PH than the D1 students, and the preferred PH was generally apical among the periodontist group. Conclusions: Only minor variations in the preferred anterior crown-mucogingival profile existed among the reviewer groups. Symmetrical tooth dimensions were preferred by all reviewer groups, but dental professionals were more aware of tooth orientation and distinct gingival profiles. Clear communication and a detailed evaluation are therefore necessary before a patient is treated.