Superior Measurement Accuracy of Digital Thickness Gauge Versus Digital Vernier Caliper in Determining Venous Tissue Thickness

• Published in: Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) CA), 2024-09, Vol.16 (9), p.e68442
• Main Authors: Ion, Alexandru Petru, Asztalos, Alexandra, Ciucanu, Claudiu Constantin, Russu, Eliza, Muresan, Adrian Vasile, Arbănași, Eliza-Mihaela, Bartus, Réka, Radu, Carmen Corina, Chirilă, Traian V, Arbănași, Emil-Marian
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accuracy; Anatomy; Biomechanics; Cardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery; Mann-Whitney U test; Measurement techniques; Other; Statistical analysis; Veins & arteries
• ISSN: 2168-8184; 2168-8184
• DOI: 10.7759/cureus.68442

Background In determining mechanical characteristics, the accuracy of the thickness of the specimens can influence the biomechanical behavior, especially in the case of human tissues, where there is an important variability. This study aims to compare the accuracy of two routine measuring instruments, i.e., the digital vernier caliper and the digital thickness gauge, when measuring the thickness of venous specimens multiple times. Methodology In this study, we used 12 tubular vena cava specimens obtained from common breed pigs aged 18-24 weeks at the time of sacrifice from a local slaughterhouse. The measurements were performed using a digital vernier caliper (Multicomp PRO MP012475) for the first four protocols and a digital thickness gauge (Mitutoyo 547-500S) for the fifth protocol. In the first protocol, three measurements were taken on the same side, and their average was recorded as the sample thickness. The second protocol involved taking measurements on two opposite sides, and the average of these measurements was recorded as the sample thickness. In the third protocol, the thickness of each side was measured at its midpoint, and the average of the four measurements was recorded as the sample thickness. In the last protocol using a digital vernier caliper, the thickness of the vernier specimens was calculated as the average of the measurements taken at each corner of the square sample. Finally, for the fifth protocol, three consecutive measurements were taken using the digital thickness gauge, and their average was recorded as the final thickness of the sample. Results In the first protocol, we observed lower values during the first measurement in comparison to the second (0.409 ± 0.063 vs. 0.536 ± 0.064, p < 0.0001) and the third (0.409 ± 0.063 vs. 0.528 ± 0.055, p = 0.0001). Moreover, with the second protocol, we observed lower values during the first two measurements in comparison to the third measurement (p = 0.0279 and p = 0.0054). Regarding protocols three and four, we recorded higher values for the second and third measurements than the first one, with higher values for the third measurement than the second one. In the fifth protocol, there were no significant statistical differences between the three consecutive measurements (p = 0.953, p = 0.742, and p = 0.897). Further, we examined the variations in sample thickness determined using each of the protocols proposed for the digital vernier caliper, as well as the values obtained with the digi