A Comparative Study of Two Methods of Quantifying the Soft Tissue Profile

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 200-207

  Hwang, Hyeon Shik ^a   Kim, Wang Sik ^a   McNamara, James A ^b,c,d  

^a Chonnam National University   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Cephalometry; Drawing method; Reproducibility; Soft tissue profile

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FACE; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICS;

ADOLESCENT; CEPHALOMETRY; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 0034204240     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Tweed CH. Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthod. 1944;30:401-460.
2. McNamara JA Jr, Brust EW, Riolo ML. Soft tissue evaluation of individuals with an ideal occlusion and a well-balanced face. In: McNamara JA Jr, ed. Esthetics and the Treatment of Facial Form. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor, Mich: Center for Human Growth and Development, The University of Michigan; 1992: 115-146.
3. Subtelny JD. A longitudinal study of soft tissue facial structures and their profile characteristics, defined in relation to underlying skeletal structures. Am J Orthod. 1958;45:481-507.
4. Burstone CJ. Integumental contour and extension patterns. Angle Orthod. 1959;29:93-104.
5. Bowker WD, Meredith HV. A metric analysis of the facial profile. Angle Orthod. 1959;29:149-160.
6. Merrifield LL. The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics. Am J Orthod. 1966;52:804-822.
7. Ricketts RM. Esthetics, environment, and the law of lip relation. Am J Orthod. 1968;54:272-289.
8. Burstone CJ, James RB, Legan H, Murphy GA, Norton LA. Cephalometrics for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg. 1978;36:269-277.
9. Holdaway RA. A soft tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod. 1983;84: 1-28.
10. Lusterman EA. The esthetics of the occidental face: a study of dentofacial morphology based upon anthropologic criteria. Am J Orthod. 1963;49:826-850.
11. Scheideman GB, Bell WH, Legan HL, Finn RA, Reisch JS. Cephalometric analysis of dentofacial normals. Am J Orthod. 1980;78: 404-420.
12. Legan HL, Burstone CJ. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg. 1980;38:744-751.
13. Park YC, Burstone CJ. Soft tissue profile-fallacies of hard-tissue standards in treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1986;90:52-62.
14. Genecov JS, Sinclair PM, Dechow PC. Development of the nose and soft tissue profile. Angle Orthod. 1990;60:191-198.
15. Nanda RS, Meng H, Kapila S, Goorhuis J. Growth changes in the soft tissue facial profile. Angle Orthod. 1990;60:177-190.
16. Fitzgerald JP, Nanda RS, Currier GF. An evaluation of the nasolabial angle and the relative inclinations of the nose and upper lip. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;102:328-334.
17. Zylinski CG, Nanda RS, Kapila S. Analysis of soft tissue facial profile in white males. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 101:514-518.
18. Formby WA, Nanda RS, Currier GF. Longitudinal changes in the adult facial profile. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;105: 464-476.
19. Margolis MJ. Esthetic considerations in orthodontic treatment of adults. Dent Clin North Am. 1997;41:29-48.
20. Steiner CC. The use of cephalometrics as an aid to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 1960;46: 721-735.