Table 3.

Long-term Combined Efficacy of Therapy and Maintenance at 52 Weeks

Outcome	Between-group improvement
	M-M versus LT-LT	M-M versus M-UC	M-M versus LT-UC	M-UC versus LT-LT	M-UC versus LT-UC	LT-UC versus LT-LT
WOMAC Global	− 3.60 (− 12.70 to 5.50)a	1.58 (− 7.26 to 10.43)a	− 2.38 (− 12.16 to 7.40)a	5.18 (− 4.29 to 14.66)a	− 3.97 (− 14.20 to 6.27)a	1.22 (− 9.11 to 11.54)a
WOMAC pain subscale	− 3.06 (− 12.85 to 6.73)a	− 1.47 (− 10.99 to 8.04)a	− 6.05 (− 16.56 to 4.46)a	1.59 (− 8.60 to 11.78)a	− 4.58 (− 15.57 to 6.41)a	− 2.99 (− 14.10 to 8.11)a
WOMAC stiffness subscale	− 1.79 (− 13.66 to 10.08)a	9.42 (− 2.01 to 20.86)a	1.09 (− 11.66 to 13.83)a	11.21 (− 1.04 to 23.46)a	− 8.34 (− 21.54 to 4.87)a	2.88 (− 10.59 to 16.34)a
WOMAC function subscale	− 6.02 (− 14.85 to 2.81)a	0.68 (− 7.82 to 9.17)a	− 3.14 (− 12.68 to 6.40)a	6.70 (− 2.40 to 15.80)a	− 3.82 (− 13.66 to 6.01)a	2.88 (− 7.17 to 12.92)a
Visual analog scale	− 5.46 (− 18.57 to 7.64)a	3.25 (− 9.41 to 15.92)a	− 10.33 (− 24.39 to 3.73)a	8.72 (− 4.93 to 22.36)a	− 13.58 (− 28.17 to 1.00)a	− 4.87 (− 19.74 to 10.01)a
Range of motion, (°)	− 1.08 (− 6.17 to 4.01)a	− 3.78 (− 8.73 to 1.17)a	− 1.78 (− 7.34 to 3.78)a	− 2.70 (− 8.02 to 2.63)a	2.00 (− 3.82 to 7.81)a	− 0.70 (− 6.54 to 5.14)a
Timed walk (ft/s)	− 0.01 (− 0.26 to 0.24)a	0.16 (− 0.08 to 0.40)a	0.01 (− 0.27 to 0.29)a	0.17 (− 0.08 to 0.43)	− 0.15 (− 0.43 to 0.13)a	0.02 (− 0.26 to 0.31)a
PROMIS-PI T-score	− 0.67 (− 3.69 to 2.35)a	1.70 (− 1.19 to 4.59)a	0.70 (− 2.58 to 3.97)a	2.37 (− 0.72 to 5.46)a	− 1.00 (− 4.39 to 2.38)a	1.37 (− 2.08 to 4.81)a

The table displays mean and CI adjusted for baseline, study site, and BMI (< 30/30+). Usual care is not included in long-term comparison. Higher scores on the WOMAC indicate worse outcome

WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities; PROMIS-PI, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference

^ap > 0.05

^bOmnibus tests of group effect