Skip to main content

Table 5 Within-group comparisons of the primary and secondary outcomes within the intervention group (exercise therapy program) and the control group (training program) in participants with wrist osteoarthritis

From: Effects of a neuromuscular joint-protective exercise therapy program for treatment of wrist osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

Outcome

Intervention group (n = 21)

Control group (n = 20)

Baseline

12 weeks

p-value

Baseline

12 weeks

p-value

PRWE

 Pain

31 [20–39]

27 [13–34]

0.13

31 [23–37]

28 [21–36]

0.13

 Function

20 [11–24]

16 [5–28]

0.17

25 [19–35]

25 [19–33]

0.38

 Total

50 [34–60]

46 [16–63]

0.13

56 [44–68]

52 [41–68]

0.17

DASH

31 [21–40]

24 [13–35]

0.09

36 [29–52]

43 [26–53]

0.91

NPRS

 At rest

3 [1–5]

3 [0–5]

0.44

3 [2–5]

4 [2–7]

0.46

 On motion without load

6 [4–8]

4 [2–7]

0.07

5 [3–8]

5 [3–8]

0.61

 On load

8 [7–9]

6 [4–8]

0.006

8 [4–8]

7 [5–8]

0.31

GSES

32 [28–36]

33 [24–37]

0.55

31 (27–35)

32 [28–36]

0.04

Wrist ROM (°)ab

 Extension

45 [30–55]

48 [36–60]

0.50

50 [35–55]

45 [35–54]

0.50

 Flexion

40 [25–48]

45 [30–45]

0.03

30 [20–40]

30 [20–50]

0.12

 Radialdeviation

10 [5–10]

10 [6–15]

0.03

5 [1–10]

7.5 [5–10]

0.78

 Ulnardeviation

20 [18–25]

20 [20–30]

0.52

20 [16–25]

20 [20–25]

0.22

 Pronation

70 [60–73]

70 [61–75]

0.23

70 [61–74]

70 [65–79]

0.41

 Supination

75 [68–80]

78 [70–80]

0.33

75 [65–80]

72 [70–80]

0.85

Grip strengthab

29 [24–36]

28 [22–39]

0.06

26 [18–37]

29 [22–34]

0.02

  1. Values are medians and interquartile range [IQR], if not specified as degrees (°)
  2. PRWE Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation, DASH Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, NPRS Numerical Pain Rating Scale, GSES Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale, ROM Range Of Motion
  3. aMissing values in control group; 1 participant
  4. bWrist ROM and grip strength were measured on the affected wrist and hand