1 / 5

Identifying position, visibility, dimensions, and angulation of the ear

Identifying position, visibility, dimensions, and angulation of the ear. Kasim Mohamed, MDS; Jayanth Christian, MDS; Karthigeyan Jeyapalan, MDS; Shanmuganathan Natarajan, MDS; Fathima Banu, MDS; Padmanabhan T. Veeravalli, MDS. Aim

hunts
Download Presentation

Identifying position, visibility, dimensions, and angulation of the ear

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Identifying position, visibility, dimensions, and angulation of the ear Kasim Mohamed, MDS; Jayanth Christian, MDS; Karthigeyan Jeyapalan, MDS; Shanmuganathan Natarajan, MDS; Fathima Banu, MDS; Padmanabhan T. Veeravalli, MDS

  2. Aim • Assess ear position with a reference plane indicator, angulations of ear in relation to nose, visibility from frontal view, and ear dimensions by using various anthropometric points of face. • Relevance • Regardless of treatment plan selected for unilaterally missing ear, existing ear’s dimensions, position, level, and prominence must be measured to predict seating and shaping of final ear prosthesis, but no such guide exists for bilateral missing ear.

  3. Method • 254 subjects between 18 and 30 yr old. • Divided into four groups based on facial form. • Reference plane indicator, facial topographical measurements, metal ruler, and digital photography were used.

  4. Results • In all facial forms except square tapering, there was a tendency for subaurale to be in line with subnasale. • Subnasale to gnathion distance was most dependent variable with ear length as constant predictor. • Interalar distance and exocanthion to endocanthion distance correlated highly significantly to ear width. • Ear visibility from front was an average 1.5 mm. • Regardless of facial form, ear angulation was generally less than nose angulation.

  5. Conclusion • Although technology has advanced and newer techniques are available, anthropometric measurements offer successful outcomes while determining positioning, dimensions, visibility, and angulation of ear prostheses.

More Related