Assessing your face in profile
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Severity of dentofacial deformity in profile: A patients perspective.
IRAS ID
231259
Contact name
Balvinder Khambay
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Birmingham
Duration of Study in the UK
3 years, 0 months, 22 days
Research summary
The human face is a complex dynamic three-dimensional structure, which is involved in verbal and non-verbal communication, identification, perception, creativity and sexuality. Our obsession with facial beauty and attractiveness encourages patients to seek treatment for their dentofacial deformity to improve their facial aesthetics and secondarily function.
To predict the final soft tissue appearance the pre-treatment profile photograph is superimposed onto the pre-treatment profile radiograph. Following this the appropriate jawbone is moved on the radiograph and the soft tissue profile photograph is “adjusted” to reflect the anticipated change. This can be carried out manually or now more commonly digitally. This profile prediction is used to confirm the surgical plan, obtain informed consent and manage patient expectations. However there are several disadvantages including error in the mock-up as it is 2D but the patient is 3D (perspective error) and perception of the mock-up as patients rarely see themselves in profile. This latter error questions the validity of using 2D mock-ups for informed consent, managing expectations and confirming the surgical plan. In addition clinicians have “concerns” in showing the patient the mock-up as it may heighten their expectations. There is no evidence in the literature suggesting this is true, in fact it has been shown that involving patients in their treatment plan increase the likelihood of satisfaction in treatment following surgery. Therefore some form of visual prediction plan prior to surgery would be beneficial.
The above process has been carried out since the introduction orthognathic surgery and has not really changed even though technological advances in imaging have been made i.e. conebeam CT, 3D facial scanning, 3D intra-oral scanning and 3D facial motion capture.
There is minimal evidence in the literature investigating the use of 2D or 3D facial prediction images from a patient’s perspective. This is an important issue as we move away from clinician-centred care to patient-centred care.
REC name
East Midlands - Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/EM/0474
Date of REC Opinion
15 Dec 2017
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion