Table 8.

Mean ± SD change in ASIA sensory total, UE, trunk and LE LT and PP scores (points) from IE to test two (first 60 days) and IE to DC examination for the OMA, MC and Other participants in the intense PT program. Sample sizes for the UE change in sensory scores are reduced due to exclusion of subjects with an IE score = 32

	OMA n = 7	Matched control n = 5	Other n = 9	Group comparisons (ANCOVA, PWC, Sidek method)
Change in total LT scores
IE to test 2	0.1 ± 4.8	4.4 ± 3.6	4.6 ± 7.6	F(2,17) = 1.7; P = 0.2
IE to DC	−0.1 ± 4.8	2.8 ± 3.6	5.4 ± 8.0	F(2,17) = 1.4; P = 0.3
Change in total PP scores
IE to test 2	−3.0 ± 4.9	0.6 ± 2.1	2.2 ± 5.1	F(2,17) = 0.7; P = 0.5
IE to DC	−3.0 ± 4.9	1.2 ± 1.6	4.6 ± 6.5	F(2,17) = 1.1; P = 0.4
Change in UE LT scores
	n = 6	n = 4
IE to test 2	−0.3 ± 1.5	2.3 ± 1.2		F(1,6) = 5.3; P = 0.06
IE to DC	0.2 ± 0.8	0.7 ± 2.5		F(1,6) = 0.2; P = 0.7
Change in UE PP scores
	n = 6	n = 4	n = 3
IE to test 2	−1.2 ± 1.0	1.0 ± 0.8	1.7 ± 2.1	F(2,9) = 6.1; P = 0.02
				OMA and Other (P = 0.04)
				OMA/MC or MC/Other not significant
IE to DC	−1.2 ± 1.0	1.0 ± 0.8	4.0 ± 5.2	F(2,9) = 4.4; P = 0.05
				OMA and Other (P = 0.05)
				OMA/MC or MC/Other not sig
Change in trunk LT scores
IE to test 2	1.4 ± 5.6	2.5 ± 2.1	1.9 ± 3.8	F(2,15) = 0.6; P = 0.6
IE to DC	0.9 ± 5.6	2.5 ± 2.1	2.4 ± 3.5	F(2,15) = 0.6; P = 0.56
Change in trunk PP scores
IE to test 2	−1.1 ± 3.2	−0.6 ± 3.1	1.3 ± 4.1	F(2,17) = 0.2; P = 0.82
IE to DC	−1.1 ± 3.2	1.0 ± 2.8	2.2 ± 4.4	F(2,17) = 0.25; P = 0.78
Change in LE LT scores
IE to test 2	−1.0 ± 1.6	1.5 ± 1.9	2.8 ± 5.9	F(2,15) = 1.7; P = 0.2
IE to DC	−1.1 ± 1.5	1.3 ± 2.5	3.3 ± 6.4	F(2,15) = 1.6; P = 0.2
Change in LE PP scores
IE to test 2	0.6 ± 1.5	−0.8 ± 1.8	0.6 ± 2.3	F(2,17) = 0.9; P = 0.42
IE to DC	0.6 ± 1.5	−0.6 ± 1.9	1.6 ± 4.0	F(2,17) = 1.0; P = 0.38