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.