Table 1.
Comparison of Change in Nursing Child Assessment of Feeding Scale Scores from Baseline to 6 Weeks
| Characteristic | Group | Baseline | 6-week follow-up | p-Value | Effect sizea |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity to Cues | MT | 13.3±2.0 | 13.6±2.3 | .063 | 0.56 |
| NMT | 13.8±1.6 | 12.6±2.8 | |||
| Social-Emotional Growth Fostering | MT | 9.7±2.4 | 9.9±2.9 | .094 | 0.43 |
| NMT | 10.7±1.8 | 9.2±2.7 | |||
| Cognitive Growth Fostering | MT | 4.8±2.0 | 5.8±1.8 | .130 | 0.37 |
| NMT | 5.5±1.7 | 5.4±1.9 | |||
| Response to Distress | MT | 10.1±1.3 | 9.9±1.5 | .282 | −0.18 |
| NMT | 9.4±2.0 | 9.9±1.3 | |||
| Response to Caregiver | MT | 5.0±2.0 | 5.6±2.2 | .121 | 0.24 |
| NMT | 6.4±1.8 | 5.6±2.8 | |||
| Clarity of Cues | MT | 9.7±2.8 | 10.6±3.4 | .471 | 0.02 |
| NMT | 10.9±2.5 | 10.8±3.5 |
Values expressed with a plus/minus sign are the mean±standard deviation. Subscales were continuous measures.
a
Effect size calculated as Cohen d value on the basis of on the mean residualized change score in massage therapy versus nonmassage therapy groups.
MT, massage therapy; NMT, nonmassage therapy.