Skip to main content

Table 3 ROM and Reduction accuracy

From: Comparison of three plate system for lateral malleolar fixation

Subgroup

Group A

Group B

Group C

p

p1

p2

p3

Davis-Weber Type A

 

ROM

53.1 ± 9.6

55.0 ± 8.0

56.8 ± 8.0

0.687a

0.666a

0.392a

0.666a

Reduction accuracy

 

Good

7(87.5%)

7(87.5%)

8(100%)

1b

1b

1b

1b

Fair

1(12.5%)

0(0%)

0(0%)

1b

1b

1b

/

Poor

0 (0%)

1(12.5%)

0(0%)

1b

1b

/

1b

Davis-Weber Type B

 

ROM

54.4 ± 10.5

55.8 ± 9.1

55.3 ± 9.1

0.832a

0.553a

0.692a

0.843a

Reduction accuracy

 

Good

28(90.3%)

28(90.3%)

30(96.8%)

0.692b

1b

0.612b

0.612b

Fair

3(9.7%)

3(9.7%)

1(3.2%)

0.692b

1b

0.612b

0.612b

Poor

0(0%)

0(0%)

0(0%)

/

/

/

/

Davis-Weber Type C

 

ROM

56.0 ± 8.8

55.5 ± 8.6

56.0 ± 8.1

0.989a

0.896a

1a

0.869a

Reduction accuracy

 

Good

9(90%)

8(80%)

9(90%)

1b

1b

1b

1b

Fair

1(10%)

2(20%)

1(10%)

1b

1b

1b

1b

Poor

0(0%)

0 (0%)

0(0%)

/

/

/

/

  1. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or number with percentage brackets (categorical data).
  2. aData were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA.
  3. bData were analyzed using the Fisher’s exact test.
  4. p stands for p value of Group A VS B VS C, p1 stands for p value of Group A VS B, p2 stands for p value of Group A VS C, p3 stands for p value of Group B VS C.