International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2015 ) > List of Articles


Influence of Color on Attractiveness of Petit Facial Mask

Matheus Melo Pithon, Matheus Souza Campos Costa, Raildo Coqueiro, Felipe Couto

Citation Information : Pithon MM, Costa MS, Coqueiro R, Couto F. Influence of Color on Attractiveness of Petit Facial Mask. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2015; 4 (2):99-103.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1105

Published Online: 01-04-2010

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2015; The Author(s).



Evaluate the esthetic attractiveness of the Petit type facial masks of different colors among youngsters from public and private schools.

Materials and methods

Eight orthopedic facial masks of the Petit type, in different colors were evaluated. Images were obtained of the same patient, and were standardized with a program for changing images (Adobe Photoshop software from CS). The following colors were inserted in the masks: white, gray, green, yellow, blue, pink, orange and black. After acquisition, the images were printed on photographic paper and incorporated into a specific and personalized questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed among children of both genders, in the age ranges from 7 to 8, and 9 to 10 years, at public and private schools (n = 200). For the scores attributed to each image, the Mann-Whitney test was used, and among groups, Spearman's correlation. The level of significance adopted was 5%.


Only the scores attributed to the color brown presented significant difference between the schoolchildren from public and private schools. In a comparison between genders, the boys awarded better scores to the colors gray, blue and black, whereas the girls awarded better scores to the color pink. When comparing the age ranges examined there were no statistical differences.


The color of the Petit type of facial mask has an influence on the esthetic attractiveness to children from 7 to 10 years, and preference for certain colors is also influenced by gender and the type of school (public or private).

How to cite this article

Pithon MM, Costa MSC, Coqueiro R, Couto F, Saini R. Influence of Color on Attractiveness of Petit Facial Mask. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2015;4(2):99-103.

PDF Share
  1. Contraindications to the use of extraoral forces in dentofacial orthopedics. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 1976;77(2):563-567.
  2. Rapid maxillary expansion compared to surgery for assistance in maxillary face mask protraction. Angle Orthod 2011;81(3):42-49.
  3. Long-term effects of class III treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;123(1):306-320.
  4. Treatment response and long-term dentofacial adaptations to maxillary expansion and protraction. Semin Orthod 1997;3(5):255-264.
  5. Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;108(1):583-592.
  6. A 9 years review of orthognathic surgery at the University of Otago. N Z Dent J 2011;107(3):117-120.
  7. Orthognathic surgery: a hierarchy of stability. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1996;11(2):191-204.
  8. Cephalometric changes after the correction of class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;116(4):13-24.
  9. The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;115(5):675-685.
  10. Maxillary protraction: treatment and post-treatment effects. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1998;113(6):612-619.
  11. Mandibular cervical headgear vs rapid maxillary expander and facemask for orthopedic treatment of class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2007;77(2):619-624.
  12. Mandibular prognathic syndrome. Orthod Fr 1976;47(1):203-219.
  13. Introduction to the biomechanical study of the facial mask and its accessories. Orthod Fr 1983;54(4):353-365.
  14. Evolution of orthodontic appliances from 1728 to 2007. Inaugural Conference of the 79th Scientific Meeting of the SFODF at Versailles, 31 May 2007. Orthod Fr 2007;78(5):295-302.
  15. Origine and evolution of extraoral therapy. Rev Belge Med Dent 1974;29(5):251-264.
  16. Orthopedic correction of class III malocclusion with palatal expansion and custom protraction headgear. J Clin Orthod 1988;22(1):314-325.
  17. An orthopedic approach to the treatment of class III malocclusion in young patients. J Clin Orthod 1987;21(3):598-608.
  18. Psychosocial aspects of craniofacial disfigurement. A ‘State of the Art’ assessment conducted by the Craniofacial Anomalies Program Branch, The National Institute of Dental Research. Am J Orthod 1979;76(2):410-422.
  19. Impact of orthognathic surgery on normal and abnormal personality dimensions: a 2-year follow-up study of 61 patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98(4):313-322.
  20. Color preferences of patients receiving elastic ligatures. Eur J Dent 2010;4(5):171-174.
  21. Orthodontic appliance preferences of children and adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2010;138(5):698-699.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.