ASSESSMENT OF AESTHETIC PERCEPTION IN FACIAL PROFILE ANGULATION AMONG FACULTY MEMBERS AND STUDENTS AT CAN THO UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND PHARMACY

Phu Qui Cao1, Yen Nhi Tran1, Hoang Thuong Huynh1, Thi Mai Phuong Le1, Cong Duc Luong1, Tran Kim Anh Kieu1, Nguyen Lam Le1, Le Thu Nhan Truong1,
1 Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Main Article Content

Abstract

  Background: Facial aesthetics plays a crucial role in social communication; however, aesthetic perception is inherently subjective and influenced by demographic factors. Objectives: 1. To assess aesthetic perception of the facial profile among students and staff; 2. To determine the association between demographic factors and this aesthetic perception. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted on 803 participants (students and staff) at Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy from May to October 2025. Data were collected using an online questionnaire incorporating standardized images representing 13 gradations of lower lip position (from −6 mm to +6 mm) relative to the esthetic E-line. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 27.0. The Kruskal–Wallis test and ordinal logistic regression were applied, with a significance level set at p≤0.05. Results: The study population consisted of 57.3% females and 42.7% males. The majority of participants preferred a neutral or slightly retruded lower lip position. Gender had a strong influence on aesthetic perception (p<0.001), with males being 1.795 times more likely than females to prefer a more protrusive lower lip (OR=1.795; 95% CI: 1.401–2.300). The participant group also showed a statistically significant difference (p=0.04), as postgraduate students tended to favor a more protrusive lower lip. In contrast, training specialty and duration of study did not demonstrate statistically significant associations with aesthetic perception (p>0.05). Conclusions: Aesthetic perception of lower lip retrusion is clearly influenced by gender and generational characteristics, yet remains stable and is not significantly altered by the length or specialty of medical training. 

Article Details

References

1. Milutinovic J., Aleksic E., Avramov S., Kalevski K., Gajic M., et al. Esthetic preferences of orthodontists, dentists, and plastic surgeons for balanced facial profiles. Journal of Oral Science. 2023.65(2), 73-76. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.22-0396.
2. Otuyemi O., Afolabi D., Oyewole T. Ricketts’ E-line Profile Preferences Among Nigerian Orthodontists, Orthodontic Trainees, and a Young Undergraduate Students’ Population. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice. 2022.25(4), 541. DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_1873_21.
3. Alshammari A.K., Algharbi M.A., Alshammari S.K., Alenzi A.A., Malik Y.R., et al. Influence of lip position on esthetics perception with respect to profile divergence using silhouette images. BMC Oral Health. 2023.23(1), 791. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03537-3.
4. Sadek M.M., Alali M.B. Influence of lip protrusion and thickness on the perception of facial profile attractiveness among subjects with different ethnic backgrounds. The Angle Orthodontist. 2025.95(6), 656-662. DOI: 10.2319/092724-796.1.
5. Hamad A.K. Preferred Facial Profile in Tanzanian Populations. EAS Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine. 2023.5(02), 38-44. DOI: 10.36349/easjdom.2023.v05i02.003.
6. Perović T. The Influence of Class II Division 2 Malocclusions on the Harmony of the Human Face Profile. Medical Science Monitor. 2017.23, 5589-5598. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.905453.
7. Volpato G.H., de Almeida-Pedrin R.R., Oltramari P.V.P., Freire Fernandes T.M., de Almeida M.R., et al. Self-perception of facial esthetics by patients with different profiles compared with assessments of orthodontists and lay people. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics: Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. 2020.158(6), 840-848. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.10.027.
8. Melo T.R.N.B. de, Brasileiro T. de O.A., Diniz M. de A.G., Costa P. de S., Júnior A.G. de O. Facial Analysis: Correlation Between Cephalometric Angles and Types of Facial Profile. The Journal of Dentists. 2020.8, 18-24. DOI:10.12974/2311-8695.2020.08.4.
9. Tipyanggul W., Changsiripun C., Chamnannidiadha N. Age-related perceptions of laypeople on Class II facial profile alterations. APOS Trends in Orthodontics. 2023.13, 15-21. DOI: 10.25259/APOS_101_2022.
10. Adamek A., Sarul M., Lis J., Kobiela Z., Kiełczawa M., et al. Influence of Lip Projection and Chin Position on Facial Profile Preferences Among Various Layers of Polish Population. Part 1. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry. 2022.14, 253-263. DOI: 10.2147/CCIDE.S358452.
11. Shimomura T., Ioi H., Nakata S., Counts A.L. Evaluation of well-balanced lip position by Japanese orthodontic patients. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2011.139(4), e291-e297. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.030.
12. Liu C., Du S., Wang Z., Guo S., Cui M., et al. Impact of orthodontic-induced facial morphology changes on aesthetic evaluation: a retrospective study. BMC Oral Health. 2024.24(1), 24. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03776-4.
13. Reddy H., Singla R., Singla N., Natarajan M., Singhal D.K. Esthetic preferences of orthodontists, general dentists, and laypersons for Indian facial profiles: A cross-sectional study. F1000Research. 2024.12, 953. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.138742.2.