To assess the perceived facial changes in class II division 1, convex profile patients treated with functional followed by fixed orthodontic appliances. The study sample consisted of 36 pairs of pre- and post-treatment photographs (frontal and profile, at rest) of 12 patients treated with activator, 12 with twin-block, and 12 controls with normal profiles, treated without functional appliances. All photographs were presented in pairs to 10 orthodontists, 10 patients, 10 parents, and 10 laypersons. Visual analog scale (VAS) ratings of changes in facial appearance were assessed. The patient groups were similar in sex distributions, age, and treatment duration. The different rater groups showed strong to excellent agreement. There were no significant differences among treatment groups (F = 0.91; P = 0.526; Wilks lambda = 0.93), raters (F = 1.68; P = 0.054; Wilks lambda = 0.83), and when testing the combined effect of treatment and rater on the results (F = 0.72; P = 0.866; Wilks lambda = 0.85). The raters detected slightly more positive changes in the activator and twin-block groups, compared to the control group, regarding the lower face and the lips, but these findings did not reach significance. Furthermore, their magnitude hardly exceeded 1/20th of the total VAS length. Retrospective study design. The perceived facial changes of convex profile patients treated with functional, followed by fixed orthodontic appliances, did not differ from those observed in normal profile patients, when full-face frontal and profile photos were simultaneously assessed. Consequently, professionals should be skeptical regarding the improvement of a patient’s facial appearance when this treatment option is used.

中文翻译：

---

II 类 1 类患者进行固定正畸治疗后的功能性面部美学结果。


为了评估 II 类 1 类中可感知的面部变化，凸面轮廓患者接受功能性正畸治疗，然后接受固定正畸矫治器治疗。研究样本包括 36 对治疗前和治疗后的照片（正面和侧面，休息时），其中包括 12 名接受激活剂治疗的患者、12 名接受双阻滞治疗的患者以及 12 名接受正常轮廓的对照组（未使用功能性矫治器治疗）。所有照片均成对展示给 10 名正牙医生、10 名患者、10 名家长和 10 名非专业人士。评估面部外观变化的视觉模拟量表（VAS）评级。患者组的性别分布、年龄和治疗持续时间相似。不同的评估者组表现出强烈到极好的一致性。治疗组（F = 0.91；P = 0.526；Wilks lambda = 0.93）、评估者（F = 1.68；P = 0.054；Wilks lambda = 0.83）之间以及测试治疗和评估者的综合效果时，没有显着差异。结果（F = 0.72；P = 0.866；Wilks lambda = 0.85）。与对照组相比，评估者发现激活剂组和双块组的下脸和嘴唇出现了稍微更积极的变化，但这些发现并未达到显着性。此外，它们的大小几乎不超过 VAS 总长度的 1/20。回顾性研究设计。当同时评估全脸正面照片和侧面照片时，接受功能性正畸治疗和固定正畸矫治器治疗的凸面轮廓患者所感知的面部变化与正常轮廓患者观察到的面部变化没有差异。因此，专业人士应对使用这种治疗方案时对患者面部外观的改善持怀疑态度。