. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019 Jan;71(1):30–38. doi: 10.1002/acr.23577

Table 3.

Associations between IPFP signal intensity measures 1 year prior and incident radiographic OA

	Univariable	Multivariable^*
	HR (95% CI)	HR (95% CI)
Mean (IPFP)	9.4 (2.4, 40.5)	12.6 (2.8, 57.2)
sDev (IPFP)	8.5 (3.4, 21.1)	8.1 (3.2, 20.4)
Mean (H)	5.1 (2.6, 9.8)	5.1 (2.6, 9.9)
sDev (H)	2.8 (1.2, 6.8)	2.8 (1.1, 6.7)
Median (H)	4.8 (2.5, 9.2)	4.8 (2.5, 9.2)
UQ (H)	4.0 (2.3, 7.2)	4.0 (2.2, 7.2)
Percentage (H)	4.8 (1.5, 15.3)	5.0 (1.6, 15.7)
Clustering factor (H)	2.7 (2.0, 3.6)	2.7 (2.0, 3.7)

N=658.

Adjustment for BMI, knee bending activities, self-reported injury and self-reported knee surgery. IPFP: infrapatellar fat pad; HR: hazard ratio; Mean (IPFP), mean value of IPFP intensity; sDev (IPFP), standard deviation of IPFP signal intensity; Mean (H), mean value of IPFP high intensity; sDev (H), standard deviation of IPFP high signal intensity; Median (H), median value of high signal intensity region; UQ(H), upper quartile value of high signal intensity region; Percentage (H): ratio of volume of high signal intensity region/whole IPFP volume; Clustering factor(H): clustering factor of high signal intensity. Significant differences at p<0.05 are shown in bold.