Comparison of intermittent pneumatic compression device and compression stockings for workers with leg edema and pain after prolonged standing: a prospective crossover clinical trial

Table 6 Post hoc results of comparison between the different treatment protocols (A-B, A-C, A-D, B-C, B-D, and C-D) on leg extracellular fluid (ECF)/total body fluid (TBF) as a secondary outcome

	Protocol	△ between the groups	p value	95% CI
Right	A-B	0.0008(0.0026)	0.008	-0.000 ~ 0.0016
	A-C	-0.0014(0.0021)	< 0.001	-0.0020 ~ -0.0007
	A-D	-0.0007(0.0040)	0.560	-0.0020 ~ 0.0006
	B-C	-0.0022(0.0026)	< 0.001	-0.0030 ~ -0.0013
	B-D	-0.0015(0.0041)	0.005	-0.0028 ~ -0.0002
	C-D	0.0007(0.0043)	0.005	-0.0007 ~ 0.0021
Left	A-B	0.0017(0.0029)	0.001	0.0007 ~ 0.0026
	A-C	-0.0015(0.0025)	< 0.001	-0.0023 ~ -0.0007
	A-D	0.0003(0.0026)	0.665	-0.0005 ~ 0.0012
	B-C	-0.0032(0.0028)	< 0.001	-0.0041 ~ -0.0023
	B-D	-0.0013(0.0030)	0.003	-0.0023 ~ -0.0004
	C-D	0.0018(0.0035)	0.001	0.0007 ~ 0.0030

Data are presented as mean difference (standard deviation)
Protocol A, no medical compression stocking (MCS) + natural rest; Protocol B, MCS + natural rest; Protocol C, no MCS + intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC); Protocol D, MCS + IPC; △, the difference of leg ECF/TBF during T1-T2 between the different treatment protocols
Wilcoxon signed rank test on difference (p < 0.008)

ISSN: 1471-2474