Gambaran Nilai Pengukuran Parameter Sefalometrik Pasien Ras Deutro Melayu Usia 6-12 Tahun Menggunakan Analisis Steiner

Main Article Content

Tasqia Alifa Syabira
Olivia Piona Sahelangi


Background: Cephalometric analysis is an important tool in the field of orthodontics. It is used to examine the growth and development of facial bones in treatment planning, and changes between before and after treatment in evaluation stage. Steiner's analysis uses angle dan distance measurements to determine the patient's skeletal position. Steiner's analysis includes the position and inclination of the incisors to the jaw and the position of the jaw to the cranial base. This study was thus carried out to describe the value of cephalometric parameter measurements of Deutro-Malay race patients aged 6-12 years using Steiner's analysis. Materials and Methods: This study is a descriptive observational method with a cross-sectional study design. Samples were taken from secondary data of cephalogram orthodontic patients RSGM FKG Usakti in 2017-2018. The analysis was carried out by measuring 11 Steiner's analysis parameters, namely: SNA, SNB, SND, ANB, Go-Gn to SN, U1-NA, L1-NB, U1-L1, Occl-SN. Results: Based on Steiner's analysis, the cephalometric mean value of RSGM FKG Usakti orthodontic patients was SNA of 80.80; SNB of 76.60; SND of 72.990; ANB of 4,240; Go-Gn to SN is 36.80; U1-NA is 26,920 and 3,93 mm; L1-NB of 32.10 and 5.98 mm; U1-L1 of 116,890; Occl-SN is 20,680. Conclusions: Malay Deutro Race has a tendency for class II, skeletal class II malocclusion, retrusive symphysis, less developed horizontal growth patterns, and incisive proclination.


Download data is not yet available.

Plum Analytics

Article Details



Devereux L, Moles D, Cunningham SJ, McKnight M. How Important Are Lateral Cephalometric Radiographs in Orthodontic Treatment Planning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(2):175-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.09.021

Celik E, Polat-Ozsoy O, Toygar Memikoglu TU. Comparison of Cephalometric Measurements with Digital versus Conventional Cephalometric Analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2009;31(3):241-6. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjn105

Cobourne MT, DiBiase AT. Handbook of Orthodontics. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Elvesier. 2010. p7-15, 133, 153, 157, 167-8.

Dika DD, Hamid T, Sylvia M. Penggunaan Index of Orthodontic Treatment (IOTN) sebagai evaluasi hasil perawatan dengan piranti lepasan. Ortho Dent J. 2011; 2(1):45-8.

Srivastava B, Bhatia HP, Singh R, Singh AK, Aggarwal A, Gupta N. Validation of Tanaka and Johnston’s Analysis In Western UP Indian Population. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013; 31(1): 36-42. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.112405

Dhakal J, Shrestha RM, Shrestha S. Applicability of Tanaka & Johnston Analysis and Prediction of New Equation For Contemporary Nepalese Sample. OJN 2013; 3(1): 14-8. Available from: DOI:

Phulari BS. Orthodontics Principles and Practice. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2011.p 63-6, 70-4.

Kadu A, Londhe SM, Kumar P, Datana S, Singh M, Gupta N. Estimating The Size of Unerupted Canine and Premolars In a Mixed Indian Population. J Dent Res Rev 2014; 1:62-5. Available from:

Liou EJ, Chen PH, Wang YC, Yu CC, Huang CS, Chen YR. Surgery-First Accelerated Orthognathic Surgery: Orthodontic Guidelines and Setup for Model Surgery. J Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69(3):771-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.11.011

Clinical Standards Committee of the British Orthodontic Society. The Justification For Orthodontic Treatment. British Orthodontic Society 2008. P 4, 7-10.

Atit MB, Deshmukh SV, Rahalkar J, Subramanian V, Naik C, Darda M. Mean Values Of Steiner, Tweed, Ricketts And Mcnamara analysis in Maratha ethnic population: A cephalometric study. APOS Trends Orthod 2013; 3:137-51. DOI: 10.4103/2321-1407.119095

Janson M, Janson G, Sant'Ana E, Simão TM, de Freitas MR. An orthodontic-surgical approach to Class II subdivision malocclusion treatment. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009;17(3):266–73. DOI:10.1590/s1678-77572009000300026

Malkoç S, Demir A, Uysal T, Canbuldu N. Angular Photogrammetric Analysis Of The Soft Tissue Facial Profile Of Turkish Adults. Eur J Orthod 2009; 31(2): 174-9. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjn082

Kumar V, Ludlow J, Soares Cevidanes LH, Mol A. In vivo comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(5):873–9. DOI:10.2319/082907-399.1

Vojdani Z, Bahmanpour S, Momeni S, Vasaghi A, Yazdizadeh A, Karamifar A, Najafifar A, Setoodehmaram S, Mokhtar A. Cephalometry in 14-18 Years Old Girls and Boys of Shiraz-Iran High School. Int. J. Morphol. 2009; 27(1):101-4. DOI:

Navarro, Navarro AC, Carreiro LS, Rossato C, Takahashi R, Lima CE. Assessing the predictability of ANB, 1-NB, P-NB and 1-NA measurements on Steiner cephalometric analysis. Dental Press J. Orthod. 2013;18(2):125-32. DOI:

Chen YW, Inami K, Matsumoto N. A Study Of Steiner Cephalometric Norms For Chinese Children. J Osaka Dent Univ. 2015; 49(2): 237–44. DOI:

Jan A, Rehman H, Taifur N, Bangash AA. Correlation Between Nasolabial Angle And Maxillary Incisor Inclination. Pak Armed Forces Med J. 2015; 65(0): S236-39.

Soeroso A. Sosiologi 2. Bogor: Penerbit Quadra; 2008.p141-2.

Cristiany, Budiyanti AE, Hidayat A, Hamilah DK. Differences of Lateral Cephalometry Values between Australo-Melanesian and Deutero-Malay Races. Journal of Dentistry Indonesia. 2013; 20(1): 9-14. DOI:

Wahab RMA, Idris H, Yacob H, Ariffin SHZ. Cephalometric and malocclusion analysis of Kadazan dusun ethnic orthodontic patients. Sains Malaysiana. 2013; 42(1): 25–32.

Mah JK, Hatcher D, Harell WE. Craniofacial Imaging in Orthodontics. In: Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KW. Orthodontics Current Principles and Techniques, 5th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Inc; 2012. p110.

Karad A. Clinical Orthodontics: Current Concepts, Goals and Mechanics. New Delhi: Elsevier Health Science; 2014. p53,107.

Saravanakumar MS, Vasanthakumari A, Bharathan R. Oral Health Status Of Special Health Care Needs Children Attending A Day Care Centre In Chennai. Int J Stud Res 2013; 3: 12-5. DOI: 10.4103/2230-7095.113814

Joshi N, Hamdan AM, Fakhouri WD. Skeletal Malocclusion: A Developmental Disorder With a Life-Long Morbidity. J Clin Med Res. 2014; 6(6): 399-408. DOI:

Nanjannawar L, Agrawal JA, Agrawal M. Pattern of Malocclusioan and Treatment Need in Orthodontic Patients: An Institution-based Study. World J Dent 2012; 3(2): 136-40. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1144

Millet D. Orthodontics I: development, assessment and treatment planning. In: Heasman P. Master Dentistry Volume 2 – Restorative Dentistry, Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2008. p215-31.

Mageet AO. Classification of Skeletal and Dental Malocclusion: Revisited. StomaEduJ. 2016; 3(2): 38-44. DOI: 10.25241/2016.3(2).11

Lopatiene K, Dumbravaite A. Relationship Between Tooth Size Discrepencies and Malocclusion. Stomatologija. 2009; 11(4): 119-24. PMID: 20179399

Araújo EA, Buschang PH. Recognizing and Correcting Developing Malocclusions: A Problem-Oriented Approach to Orthodontics. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons; 2016. p42-53.

Premkumar S. Textbook Of Orthodontics. New Delhi: Elsevier Health Science; 2015. 175-205, 274-7.

Ousehal L, Lazrak L, Chafii A. Cephalometric Norms for a Moroccan Population. Int Orthod. 2012; 10(1): 122-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2011.12.001

Karunanithi C, Rajmohan M, Nanda BI, Sharanya Dhevi, Ali AA. A Cephalometric Appraisal of Steiner’s Analysis Normal Occlusion in Chennai Suburban and Rural Area of Population in the Age Group of 14 – 21 Years. University Journal of Surgery and Surgical Specialities. 2018, 4(2)