Skip to main content

Table 8 Joint spaces with different parameters in each approach

From: Is the retromandibular approach a suitable approach to anatomical reduction of unilateral subcondylar fracture? A non-randomized clinical trial

Submandibular approach

Acronym

AJS

PJS

MJS

SJS

Pearson

P value

Pearson

P value

Pearson

P value

Pearson

P value

CDMLi (HP)

.142

.643

-.379

.202

-.104

.73

-.211

.489

CDVi (VP)

.546

.054

.216

.479

-.005

.987

.060

.845

CDAPi (MSP)

-.106

.729

-.280

.354

-.231

.447

.067

.828

CDVp

.226

.458

-.068

.824

-.009

.976

.739

.004

CDAPp

.699

.008

-.085

.782

-.320

.287

.095

.757

CDMLp

.537

.059

.458

.458

.571

.041

.142

.644

Retromandibular approach

 CDMLi (HP)

.265

.322

.402

.123

.267

.317

.250

.349

 CDVi (VP)

.223

.407

.136

.615

-.596

.015

-.535

.033

 CDAPi (MSP)

-.168

.534

-.040

.884

-.303

.254

.303

.255

 CDVp

-.195

.469

-.332

.209

-.303

.255

.275

.303

 CDAPp

-.100

.710

-.153

.570

-.111

.683

.291

.274

 CDMLp

-.247

.357

-.496

.051

.616

.011

.065

.812

  1. Bold is less than 0.05