Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 29;20:109. doi: 10.1186/s12882-019-1299-9

Table 2.

Cross-sectional analyses of parameters of physical functioning and physical activity

Cross-sectional analyses Recipients vs. Donors (baseline)
Handgrip strength (kg)
 Recipient (n = 20) 24.3 [20.0–39.0]
 Donor (n = 22) 29.5 [23.0–37.8]
 p-value 0.378a
SF-36 PCS score (%)
 Recipient (n = 21) 46.3 [38.1–51.2]
 Donor (n = 22) 56.3 [54.3–57.8]
 p-value < 0.001
SF-36 Physical functioning (%)
 Recipient (n = 21) 46.1 [41.8–52.5]
 Donor (n = 22) 56.8 [52.0–56.8]
 p-value < 0.001
Number of Steps/day b
 Recipient (n = 15) 6003.0 [3608.0–10,429.0]
 Donor (n = 14) 12,711.0 [9460.5–15,194.0]
 p-value 0.004
TEE/kg/day −1 b
 Recipient (n = 15) 29.4 [26.5–34.2]
 Donor (n = 14) 32.7 [31.0–37.7]
 p-value 0.063
AEE/kg/day −1b
 Recipient (n = 15) 2.3 [1.0–8.7]
 Donor (n = 14) 7.6 [5.7–9.9]
 p-value 0.016

Data are presented as median [25th and 75th percentile]

SF short form, TEE total energy expenditure, AEE activity related energy expenditure

aAfter adjustment for differences in sex and bodyweight p = 0.047, c Data available in 15 recipients/14 donors