Table 2.
Distribution of wound tenderness in the two groups
| Baseline | V1 | V2 | V3 | V4 | Study end | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lornoxicam (n = 20) | ||||||
| Non-tender | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 (10 %) |
| Tender | 0 | 1 (5 %) | 11 (55 %) | 12 (60 %) | 15 (75 %) | 18 (90 %) |
| Highly tender | 20 (100 %) | 19 (95 %) | 9 (45 %) | 8 (40 %) | 5 (25 %) | 0 |
| Tramadol (n = 18) | ||||||
| Non-tender | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 (11 %) |
| Tender | 0 | 2 (11 %) | 5 (27 %) | 7 (38 %) | 11 (61 %) | 16 (88 %) |
| Highly tender | 18 (100 %) | 16 (88 %) | 13 (72 %) | 11 (61 %) | 7 (38 %) | 0 |
Difference between groups was not statistically significant at any time point by Kruskal–Wallis ANOVA test