Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Facial aesthetics and perceived need for further treatment among adults with repaired cleft as assessed by cleft team professionals and laypersons|
|Citation:||European Journal of Orthodontics, 2013; 35(3):341-346|
|Publisher:||Oxford Univ Press|
|Peter Foo, Wayne Sampson, Rachel Roberts, Lisa Jamieson and David David|
|Abstract:||SUMMARY: The objectives of this study were to compare the ratings of professionals and laypeople with and without a cleft regarding the facial aesthetics of adult patients previously treated for orofacial clefting. The necessity for further treatment, as perceived by the respective groups, is also compared. The design of the study was a cross-sectional study. Professionals (two plastic surgeons, one dentist, one orthodontist, and one psychologist) and laypeople (one male and one female adult without a cleft and one male and one female adult with a cleft) were recruited to rate photographs of 80 non-syndromic cleft patients treated by the Australian Craniofacial Unit from 1975 to 2009. Facial aesthetics were measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS; 0–100 mm). High values indicated good aesthetics. Necessity for further treatment was also measured by a VAS (0–100 mm). High values indicated high perceived need for further treatment. The professionals rated facial aesthetics significantly lower and had a lower perception of need for further treatment than the raters with and without a cleft. The laypeople with a cleft rated facial aesthetics significantly higher and had a lower perceived need for further treatment than laypeople without a cleft. The non-surgical professionals rated facial aesthetics significantly lower and had a lower perceived need for further treatment than the surgical professionals. Differences exist in the facial aesthetics ratings and perceived need for further surgery between professionals and laypeople with and without a cleft. This should be considered when managing cleft treatment expectations.|
Attitude of Health Personnel
Attitude to Health
|Rights:||© The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.