Abstract
The purpose of this experimental study is to validate linear and angular measurements acquired in a virtual reality (VR) environment via a comparison with the physical measurements. The hypotheses tested are as follows: VR linear and angular measurements (1) are equivalent to the corresponding physical measurements and (2) achieve a high degree of reproducibility. Both virtual and physical measurements were performed by two raters in four different sessions. A total of 40 linear and 15 angular measurements were acquired from three physical objects (an L-block, a hand model, and a dry skull) via the use of fiducial markers on selected locations. After both intra- and inter-rater reliability were evaluated using inter-class coefficient (ICC), equivalence between virtual and physical measurements was analyzed via paired t test and Bland-Altman plots. The accuracy of the virtual measurements was further estimated using two one-sided tests (TOST) procedure. The reproducibility of virtual measurements was evaluated via ICC as well as the repeatability coefficient. Virtual reality measurements were equivalent to physical measurements as evidenced by a paired t test with p values of 0.413 for linear and 0.533 for angular measurements and Bland-Altman plots in all three objects. The accuracy of virtual measurements was estimated to be 0.5 mm for linear and 0.7° for angular measurements, respectively. Reproducibility in VR measurements was high as evidenced by ICC of 1.00 for linear and 0.99 for angular measurements, respectively. Both linear and angular measurements in the VR environment are equivalent to the physical measurements with high accuracy and reproducibility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
de Giorgio A, Romero M, Onori M, Wang L: Human-machine collaboration in virtual reality for adaptive production engineering. Procedia Manufacturing 11:1279–1287, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.07.255
Dascal J, Reid M, IsHak WW, Spiegel B, Recacho J, Rosen B, Danovitch I: Virtual reality and medical inpatients: a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Innovations in clinical neuroscience, 14(1–2):14–21, 2017. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28386517
Riener R., Harders M. Introduction to virtual reality in medicine. In: Virtual Reality in Medicine, London: Springer, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4011-5_9
King F, Jayender J, Bhagavatula SK, Shyn PB, Pieper S, Kapur T, Fichtinger G: An immersive virtual reality environment for diagnostic imaging. J Med Robot Res 1(01):1640003, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424905X16400031
Sutherland J, Belec J, Sheikh A, Chepelev L, Althobaity W, Chow BJW, Mitsouras D, Christensen A, Rybicki FJ, La Russa DJ: Applying modern virtual and augmented reality technologies to medical images and models. J Digit Imaging 32(1):38–53, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-018-0122-7
Vertemati M, Cassin S, Rizzetto F, Vanzulli A, Elli M, Sampogna G, Gallieni M: A virtual reality environment to visualize three-dimensional patient-specific models by a mobile head-mounted display. Surg Innov 26:359–370, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350618822860
Jerdan SW, Grindle M, van Woerden HC, Kamel Boulos MN: Head-mounted virtual reality and mental health: critical review of current research. JMIR Serious Games 6(3):e14, 2018. https://doi.org/10.2196/games.9226
Theart RP, Loos B, Powrie YS, Niesler TR: Improved region of interest selection and colocalization analysis in three-dimensional fluorescence microscopy samples using virtual reality. PLoS One 13(8):e0201965, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201965
Theart RP, Loos B, Niesler TR: Virtual reality assisted microscopy data visualization and colocalization analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 18(2):64, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-016-1446-2
Sharma A, Bajpai P, Singh S, Khatter K: Virtual reality: blessings and risk assessment. arXiv preprint, 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.09540v1
Ball J, Balogh E, Miller BT eds. Improving diagnosis in health care. National Academies Press, 2015 https://doi.org/10.7205/MILMED-D-15-00562
de Oliveira MV, Wenzel A, Campos PS, Spin-Neto R: Quality assurance phantoms for cone beam computed tomography: a systematic literature review. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 46(3):20160329, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160329
Bland JM, Altman DG: Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 8:135–160, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029900800204
Norušis MJ: SPSS 14.0 Guide to Data Analysis. USA: Prentice Hall, 2002
Schuirmann DJ: A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 15:657–680, 1987. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068419
Bethel EW, Bastacky SJ, Schwartz K: Interactive stereo electron microscopy enhanced with virtual reality. Proc. SPIE 4660, Stereoscopic Displays and Virtual Reality Systems IX, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.468055
Brady R, Pixton J, Baxter G, Moran P, Potter CS, Carragher B, Belmont A: Crumbs: a virtual environment tracking tool for biological imaging. Biomedical Visualization, pp. 18–25, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIOVIS.1995.528701.
McCarthy CJ, Alvin YC, Do S, Dawson SL, Uppot RN: Interventional radiology training using a Dynamic Medical Immersive Training Environment (DynaMITE). J Am Coll Radiol 15(5):789–793, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2017.12.038
Hagedorn JG, Dunkers JP, Satterfield SG, Peskin AP, Kelso JT, Terrill JE: Measurement tools for the immersive visualization environment: steps toward the virtual laboratory. J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol 112(5):257–270, 2007. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.112.019
Preim B, Tietjen C, Spindler W, Peitgen H: Integration of measurement tools in medical 3d visualizations. IEEE Visualization, VIS, 21–28, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1109/VISUAL.2002.1183752
Reitinger B, Schmalstieg D, Bornik A, Beichel R: Spatial analysis tools for virtual reality-based surgical planning. In 3D User Interfaces, IEEE, pp. 37–44, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2006.121
Scholtes VA, Terwee CB, Poolman RW: What makes a measurement instrument valid and reliable? Injury 42(3):236–240, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.042
Pantelidis, P., Chorti, A., Papagiouvanni, I., Paparoidamis, G., Drosos, C., Panagiotakopoulos, T., & Sideris, M. Virtual and augmented reality in medical education. Medical and Surgical Education - Past, Present and Future, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.71963
Aïm F, Lonjon G, Hannouche D, Nizard R: Effectiveness of virtual reality training in orthopaedic surgery. Arthroscopy 32(1):224–232, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2015.07.023
Tepper OM, Sorice S, Hershman GN, Saadeh P, Levine JP, Hirsch D: Use of virtual 3-dimensional surgery in post-traumatic craniomaxillofacial reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 69(3):733–741, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.11.028
Orentlicher G, Goldsmith D, Horowitz A: Applications of 3-dimensional virtual computerized tomography technology in oral and maxillofacial surgery: current therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68(8):1933–1959, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2010.03.013
McCloy R, Stone R: Science, medicine, and the future, virtual reality in surgery. BMJ 323(7318):912–915, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7318.912
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed Consent
This article does not contain patient data.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Highlights
• First validation study on the linear and angular measurements in a state-of-the-art VR system
• Both linear and angular measurements in the VR environment studied are statistically equivalent to physical measurements
• Reproducibility of both linear and angular measurements in the studied VR environment is high
• The accuracy of both linear and angular measurements in the studied VR environment is estimated.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Anik, A.A., Xavier, B.A., Hansmann, J. et al. Accuracy and Reproducibility of Linear and Angular Measurements in Virtual Reality: a Validation Study. J Digit Imaging 33, 111–120 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-019-00259-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-019-00259-3