BACKGROUND:

Patients with excessive gingival display (EGD) are treated with lip repositioning surgeries (LRS). This study used a questionnaire to analyze and evaluate how patients who received LRS with modified and traditional techniques perceived their own oral and facial esthetics at various timelines after their surgeries.

METHODS:

An orofacial esthetic questionnaire (OEQ) was used in this cross-sectional study. The participants were patients who underwent LRS for the treatment of their EGD. They were divided into control (n=100) and test (n=100) groups. For the control group, LRS were performed using traditional/conventional techniques, and for the test group, LRS were performed using a modified approach. An OEQ was used to record responses. The scale comprised eight questions targeted to capture participating patients' perceptions about their own oral and facial esthetics at four timelines (baseline and one-month, six-month, and one-year follow-up). Patients responded to each question on a 10-point Likert scale (0 very dissatisfied, 10 very satisfied). Data was analyzed by independent samples T-tests using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 21.0 software (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY).

RESULTS:

Seven (3.5%) out of the total (N=200) patients were unable to take part in the study's OEQ. At one-year follow-up, the mean and standard deviation (SD) for the test group's gingival display (GD) were 2.48±0.86 mm and 3.77±1.76 mm, respectively, and comparisons revealed that the test group's GD was significantly lower (p=0.000) than the control group. Results from the participant responses to OEQ using the Likert scale at one-year follow-up revealed significant differences between the control and test groups for all questions, except question 5 (p=0.06), as the shape of the teeth will not be affected by LRS. Patients in the test group who underwent LRS with a modified approach have a high level of satisfaction (satisfaction score >9). Patients in the control group scored their satisfaction less favorably, with certain questions (question 3) receiving scores as low as 0.31. Perception of oral and facial esthetics was significantly higher for the test group at different time points. At one-year follow-up, the mean difference was 4.46, which was the greatest (p=0.000).

CONCLUSIONS:

EGD improved significantly at one year with the modified lip repositioning technique. The satisfaction level of patients with outcomes of the modified lip repositioning was significantly higher as compared to the satisfaction level of patients who underwent the conventional technique.