Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 5;30(6):1937–1948. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06851-x

Table 2.

Logistic regression analyses for interaction between the baseline characteristics and treatment at 3, 12, and 24 months

Baseline characteristic 3 months
(< MIC 139 vs. ≥ MIC 174)a
12 months
(< MIC 80 vs. ≥ MIC 199)a
24 months
(< MIC 71 vs. ≥ MIC 218)a
Marker-by-treatment interaction Marker-by-treatment interaction Marker-by-treatment interaction
ORb
(95% CI)
p value for interaction ORb
(95% CI)
p value for interaction ORb
(95% CI)
p value for interaction
Age 0.95 (0.89–1.02) n.s. (0.14) 0.93 (0.84–1.00) 0.06* 0.92 (0.84–0.10) 0.05*
Education level (1–7) 1.02 (0.41–2.50) n.s. (0.97) 0.65 (0.22–1.90) n.s. (0.43) 1.01 (0.34–3.02) n.s. (0.98)
BMI 0.93 (0.83–1.05) n.s. (0.24) 0.86 (0.75–0.10) 0.05* 0.94 (0.82–1.09) n.s. (0.41)
Knee function on the IKDC (0–100) 1.04 (0.10–1.07) 0.07* 1.01 (0.97–1.05) n.s. (0.52)0 1.03 (0.99–1.08) n.s. (0.16)
General physical health on RAND-36 PSC (0–100) 1.08 (1.02–1.15) 0.01* 1.05 (0.99–1.12) n.s. (0.11) 1.04 (0.97–1.11) n.s. (0.30)
Pain intensity during activities on VAS (0–100) 0.97 (0.95–0.10) 0.02* 0.99 (0.96–1.01) n.s. (0.25) 0.10 (0.97–1.02) n.s. (0.79)
Expectation of pain relief (1–7) 1.31 (0.63–2.71) n.s. (0.47) 0.88 (0.38–2.06) n.s. (0.77) 1.62 (0.65–4.07) n.s. (0.30)
Knee osteoarthritis on K–L scale (0–4)c 0.71 (0.27–1.85) n.s. (0.48) 0.99 (0.32–3.11) n.s. (0.99) 1.22 (0.39–3.87) n.s. (0.74)

Abbreviations: MIC minimally important change, OR odds ratio, CI confidence intervals, IKDC International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee, RAND-36 PCS Physical Component Scale for or general physical health, BMI body mass index, K–L Kellgren–Lawrence scale

Marker-by-treatment interactions per follow-up moment are shown

a(n =  < MIC vs. n =  ≥ MIC) For each follow-up moment the distribution of patients who experienced MIC in knee function (improvement ≥ 11 IKDC points) and patients who did not experience a MIC in knee function (changed IKDC score < 11 points) is reported. The reference treatment is physical therapy. Data were available of 313 patients at 3 months, 279 patients at 12 months, and 289 patients at 24 months

bFor each marker-by-treatment interaction, the OR shows the relative change per unit increase in the marker and we reported the 95% CI of the OR. An OR ≥ 1 indicates the value is in favour of physical therapy. The p values expressed whether the marker-by-treatment interaction is significant (p ≤ 0.1)

cWe analysed educational level, expectation of pain relief an K–L score as a continuous variable in the logistic regression analyses

*Indicates the baseline characteristics that are potential treatment selection markers