. 2020 Sep 22;278(8):2795–2806. doi: 10.1007/s00405-020-06360-6

Table 3.

Statistics in anatomical distance measurements obtained in the conventional cross-sectional view (PACS) and in the VR environment

Subject	Method	Mean difference [%]	SD [%]	95% CI for mean difference [%]	Mean difference between PACS and VR [%] ^a	ICC PACS vs. VR
1	PACS	− 0.198	11.791	− 3.386; 2.989	2.825 (p = 0.186)	0.978
1	VR	− 3.023	16.621	− 7.517; 1.470	2.825 (p = 0.186)	0.978
2	PACS	4.130	18.650	− 0.912; 9.172	1.980 (p = 0.519)	0.923
2	VR	2.113	16.075	− 2.232; 6.495	1.980 (p = 0.519)	0.923
3	PACS	− 3.097	22.239	− 9.109; 2.915	− 4.864 (p = 0.174)	0.936
3	VR	1.915	20.863	− 3.690; 7.591	− 4.864 (p = 0.174)	0.936
4	PACS	− 2.988	59.020	− 18.943; 12.967	11.054 (p = 0.268)	0.900
4	VR	− 14.137	39.732	− 24.878; − 3.396	11.054 (p = 0.268)	0.900
5	PACS	2.645	16.863	− 1.914; 7.203	0.300 (p = 0.971)	0.971
5	VR	2.388	13.900	− 1.379; 6.146	0.300 (p = 0.971)	0.971
Total ^b	PACS	12.824	27.451	9.565; 16.083	1.923 (p = 0.396)	0.942 (mean)
Total ^b	VR	13.140	20.238	10.737; 15.542	1.923 (p = 0.396)	0.942 (mean)

Measurements evaluated as a percentage difference compared to the median.

SD standard deviation, CI confidence interval, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient (p < 0.001), PACS conventional cross-sectional (2D) method, VR virtual reality environment

^aPaired sample t-test

^bAbsolute measurement values used