Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of immediate intervention and delayed intervention participants.
Characteristics | All (N=34) |
Immediate intervention (n=17) |
Delayed intervention (n=17) |
P valuea | |
Women, n (%) | 28 (82) | 14 (82) | 14 (82) | N/Ab | |
Age in years, mean (SD) | 55.5 (8.6) | 52.3 (9.7) | 58.7 (6.0) | .03 | |
Marital status, n (%) | .40 | ||||
Married or common law | 25 (74) | 11 (65) | 14 (82) | ||
Separated or divorced | 5 (15) | 4 (24) | 1 (6) | ||
Widowed, never married, or other | 4 (12) | 2 (12) | 2 (12) | ||
Gross annual household income in Can $, n (%) | .52 | ||||
≤12,000 | 2 (6) | 1 (6) | 1 (6) | ||
12,001-24,000 | 1 (3) | 0 | 1 (6) | ||
24,001-40,000 | 2 (6) | 0 | 2 (12) | ||
40,001-60,000 | 5 (15) | 4 (24) | 1 (6) | ||
60,001-80,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
80,001-100,000 | 3 (9) | 2 (12) | 1 (6) | ||
>100,000 | 14 (41) | 7 (41) | 7 (41) | ||
No answer | 7 (21) | 3 (18) | 4 (24) | ||
OAc diagnosis, n (%) | .73 | ||||
Yes | 20 (59) | 11 (65) | 9 (53) | ||
No, but met the “likely OA” criteria | 14 (41) | 6 (35) | 8 (47) | ||
“In general, would you say your health is…”, n (%) | .15 | ||||
Excellent | 6 (18) | 5 (29) | 1 (6) | ||
Very good | 11 (32) | 5 (29) | 6 (35) | ||
Good | 13 (38) | 4 (26) | 9 (53) | ||
Fair | 4 (12) | 3 (18) | 1 (6) | ||
Poor | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
“Compared with 1 year ago, how would you rate your health in general now?”, n (%) | .25 | ||||
Much better | 1 (3) | 1 (6) | 0 | ||
Somewhat better | 1 (3) | 0 | 1 (6) | ||
About the same | 27 (79) | 15 (88) | 12 (71) | ||
Somewhat worse | 5 (15) | 1 (6) | 4 (24) | ||
Much worse | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Number of comorbid conditions, median (25th; 75th percentile) | 2.5 (2.0; 4.0) | 3.0 (2.0; 4.0) | 2.0 (2.0; 3.0) | 0.53 | |
Body mass index in kg/m2, mean (SD) | 27.2 (4.7) | 29.1 (4.5) | 25.4 (4.2) | 0.02 |
aP values were based on exact chi-square tests for categorical variables (nonmissing data), and 2-sample t tests for continuous variables.
bN/A: not applicable.
cOA: osteoarthritis.