Physical function in men with and without hip osteoarthritis1 Merja H Arokoski, MD, Mikko Haara, MD, Heikki J Helminen, DMSc, Jari P Arokoski, DMSc Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Volume 85, Issue 4, Pages 574-581 (April 2004) DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011
Fig 1 Mean WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index scores ± SD in groups with different grades of hip OA (A) according to both limbs and (B) according to the side more severely affected. Radiographic grading was made according to Li et al.13 ∗P<.05, differences between the radiographic OA subgroups (n=8–11) (Kruskal-Wallis test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)
Fig 2 Mean PROM ± SD in patients with different grades of hip OA. Radiographic grading was made according to Li et al.13 ∗P<.05; †P<.01; differences between the radiographic OA subgroups (n=8–11) (Kruskal-Wallis test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)
Fig 3 Mean PROM ± SD of the hip in controls (n=29–30) and men with hip OA (n=26). ∗P<.01; †P<.001 (Student t test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)
Fig 4 Mean differences in PROM ± SD within the hip OA group, when the radiographic scoring difference is ≥1 grade (n=20). Radiographic grading was made according to Li et al.13 ∗P<.05; †P<.01 (paired t test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)
Fig 5 Mean functional tests ± SD in controls (n=21–29) and in men with hip OA (n=20–27). ∗P<.01; †P<.001 (Student t test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)
Fig 6 Differences in 1-leg functional tests in OA group, when the radiographic scoring difference is ≥1 grade (n=18–21). Radiographic grading was made according to Li et al.13 There were no significant differences between sides (paired t test). Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004 85, 574-581DOI: (10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.011)