Stephan and Henneberg used the distance between the canine teeth as a means of estimating mouth width when the face is in a neutral expression. The authors are from the University of Adelaide in Australia.
Patient selection: 93 male and female participants, probably adults, with Asian and European ancestry. While the number of European females was good (44), only 5 "others" were measured.
Measurement: distance between the most lateral aspects of the canines
NOTE: I could not find reference to use of the maxillary/upper vs mandibular/lower canines. Looking in the mirror, the intercanine distance for the upper canines is greater than that seen with the lower canines. I will use the upper canines in the spreadsheet.
The mouth width was referred to as the chelion-to-chelion distance.
ratio of canine-to-canine vs chelion-to-chelion distance for all groups =
= 0.758
mouth width in centimeters using the average factor for all races and both genders =
= 1 / (0.758) * (intercanine distance in cm) = (1.31926 * (intercanine distance in cm))
Group |
Factor |
Central or Southeast Asian, male |
1.3055 |
Central or Southeast Asian, female |
1.2516 |
European, male |
1.3298 |
European, female |
1.3387 |
other |
1.3680 |
Specialty: Otolaryngology
ICD-10: ,