Skip to main content

Table 4 The comparison results between two learning sequences (Group A vs. B)

From: Accuracy assessment of implant placement with versus without a CAD/CAM surgical guide by novices versus specialists via the digital registration method: an in vitro randomized crossover study

Group

Method

Measurement

Mean ± SD

Difference

Statistical method

95% CI

P

A

B

    

Students

SG

Coronal distance deviation

0.61 ± 0.29

0.67 ± 0.40

-0.06

independent-samples T test

-0.24 ~ 0.12

0.512

Apical distance deviation

1.04 ± 0.48

1.14 ± 0.61

-0.10

-0.38 ~ 0.19

0.504

Angular deviation

2.74 ± 1.55

3.05 ± 1.81

-0.31

-1.18 ~ 0.56

0.484

FH

Coronal distance deviation

1.00 ± 0.56

1.10 ± 0.48

-0.10

independent-samples T test

-0.37 ~ 0.17

0.479

Apical distance deviation

1.79 ± 0.70

1.48 ± 0.61

0.31

-0.03 ~ 0.65

0.073

Angular deviation

6.79 ± 2.89

4.38 ± 1.73

2.41

1.19 ~ 3.65

 < 0.001***

Instructors

SG

Coronal distance deviation

0.48 ± 0.16

0.56 ± 0.45

-0.07

Mann–Whitney U test

/

0.834

Apical distance deviation

1.04 ± 0.40

0.71 ± 0.41

0.32

/

0.295

Angular deviation

3.11 ± 1.45

1.66 ± 1.22

1.46

/

0.175

FH

Coronal distance deviation

0.64 ± 0.13

0.56 ± 0.30

0.08

Mann–Whitney U test

/

0.346

Apical distance deviation

0.87 ± 0.25

0.69 ± 0.36

0.18

/

0.602

Angular deviation

2.55 ± 1.33

2.32 ± 1.09

0.23

/

0.917

  1. ***p < 0.001