Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2014 Apr 15;22(6):726–733. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2014.04.002

Table 2.

Unadjusted and adjusted treatment effects on change in BMD by region.

Change in
BMD by Region
Exercise (n=95) Diet (n=88) Diet + Exercise (n=101) Overall
p-value*

Mean (95% CI) % Chg Mean (95% CI) % Chg Mean (95% CI) % Chg
Δ Total Hip BMD (mg/cm2)
 Unadjusted −2.1 (−8.2, 4.0) −0.2 −24.0 (−30.3, −17.6) −2.5 −19.4 (−25.3, −13.5) −2.0 <0.01**
 Adjusted −2.0 (−8.5, 4.4) −0.2 −23.7 (−30.3, −17.2) −2.4 −19.5 (−25.8, 13.2) −2.0 <0.01**
Δ Femoral Neck BMD (mg/cm2)
 Unadjusted −2.6 (−8.2, 2.9) −0.3 −15.3 (−21.0, −9.5) −1.9 −14.4 (−19.8, −9.1) −1.8 <0.01**
 Adjusted −0.8 (−6.6, 5.0) −0.1 −13.2 (−19.1, −7.3) −1.7 −12.5 (−18.1, −6.8) −1.6 <0.01**
Δ Spine BMD (mg/cm2)
 Unadjusted 5.2 (−2.1, 12.4) 0.5 3.5 (−4.0, 11.0) 0.3 −0.9 (−7.9, 6.1) −0.1 0.47
 Adjusted 7.5 (−0.2, 15.1) 0.7 5.4 (−2.4, 13.2) 0.5 1.5 (−6.0, 9.0) 0.1 0.50

Unadjusted estimates are based on a one-way ANOVA at 18 months. Model-adjusted estimates control for gender, baseline BMI and baseline risk factor value. Abbreviations: BMD = areal bone mineral density; n = sample size; SE = standard error.

*

p-value at 18 months performed based on test from a contrast statement to compare groups.

**

E differs significantly from D and D+E (p<0.01)