Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison of date between control subjects (n = 10) and patients with RA (n = 41)

From: Plantar plate pathology is associated with erosive disease in the painful forefoot of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Demographic characteristics and pain

Controls (n = 10)

RA (n = 41)

Test, statistic, significance

 Age, yrs.:

mean (SD), range

55.6 (8.0), 42–72

55.3 (11.5), 25–77

Student’s t-test, t = 0.07, p = 0.283

 Sex:

% female (n)

70.0% (7/10)

78.0% (32/41)

Chi-sq., χ2 = 0.29, p = 0.591

 VAS pain, mm:

median (IQR), range

0.0 (0.0–0.3), 0–2

36.0 (18.0–70.0), 8–95

Mann-Whitney U, z = 4.87, p < 0.001

Functional impairment and foot deformity

Controls (n = 10)

RA (n = 41)

 

 FISIF score:

median (IQR)

1 (0–3)

13 (11–15)

Mann-Whitney U, z = 4.82, p < 0.001

 FISAP score:

median (IQR)

0 (0–0)

16 (11–23)

Mann-Whitney U, z = 4.89, p < 0.001

 Platto forefoot index:

median (IQR)

2 (1–2)

9 (5–10)

Mann-Whitney U, z = 3.71, p < 0.001

 Gait velocity, cm/s:

mean (95% CI)

117.78 (4.67)

92.70 (4.38)

Student’s t-test, t = 3.92, p = 0.001

 Subluxation:

% patients (n)

0.0% (0/10)

70.7% (29/41)

Chi-sq., χ2 = 16.40, p < 0.001

% joints (n)

0.0 (0/40)

61.6% (101/164)

ML log rega

 Callus:

% patients (n)

60.0% (6/10)

43.9% (18/41)

Chi-sq., χ2 = 0.84, p = 0.360

% joints (n)

17.5% (7/40)

17.7% (29/164)

ML log reg, z = −0.08, p = 0.939

 Plantar plate pathology:

% patients (n)

20.0% (2/10)

85.4% (35/41)

Chi-sq., χ2 = 17.24, p < 0.001

% joints (n)

5.0% (2/40)

46.6% (76/163)

ML log reg; z = 3.57, p < 0.001

 Peak pressure, kPa:

 Peak pressure, kPa:

max per patient median (IQR)

individual joint geometric mean

563.3 (454.6–773.8)

323.75

746.7 (555.0–1145.0)

399.41

Mann-Whitney U, z = 1.90, p = 0.058

ML lin reg; z = −1.66, p = 0.096

  1. AP Activity and Participation, Chi-sq. Pearson’s chi-square, FIS Foot Impact Scale, IF Impairment and Footwear, lin linear, log logistic, ML multilevel, reg regression, t Student’s independent samples t-statistic, VAS Visual Analogue Scale, z normal distribution standardised statistic
  2. aThe multilevel model could not be run due to the fact that none of the control patients had any joints showing subluxation