Table 3.
Comparison of the results between CT, KT, and sham groups.
| Outcomes | Results∗ | Differences between groups |
p value (main effect of Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA) |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (post hoc analysis) | |||||
| CT/KT | CT/sham | KT/sham | |||
| Resting bioelectrical activity (µV) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.5892 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.7014 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.3939 | |
|
| |||||
| Visual analogue scale (VAS) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.0018 | p = 0.0017 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.6259 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.1897 | |
|
| |||||
| The range of flexion movement (cm) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.3859 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.1440 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.4227 | |
|
| |||||
| The range of extension movement (cm) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.4890 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.2646 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.0529 | |
|
| |||||
| The range of left lateral flexion movement (cm) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.1427 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.9505 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.0541 | |
|
| |||||
| The range of right lateral flexion movement (cm) Mean ± SD |
I | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.2622 |
| II | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.8262 | |
| III | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p > 0.05 | p = 0.0862 | |
∗Results:
Result I—post- minus pre-intervention results.
Result II—follow-up minus pre-intervention results.
Result III—follow-up minus post-intervention results.