PHYS THER
Vol. 89, No. 11, November 2009, pp. 1254-1255
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20080283.cx
Young IA, et al. "Manual therapy, exercise, and traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy..." Phys Ther. 2009;89:632–642.
Errors1,2 were found in Table 3 in this article, and these errors required changes to the narrative as well. The revised Table 3 contains corrections that address transposition errors, inconsistent use of 100th versus 10th decimal points that are now consistent, and incorrect calculation of 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All values and 95% CIs have been verified for accuracy, and the correct values appear in the revised Table 3 (next page). The 95% CIs for adjusted effect sizes at 4 weeks were reported incorrectly in the text. The Results section, with corrections in bold, appears below. In addition, because of the changes to the 95% CIs, the second paragraph in the Discussion section—on precision of point estimates—has changed. The rewritten paragraph appears below. The authors regret the errors.
 | Results |
|---|
Patients (N=121) were screened for eligibility, and 81 patients were eligible and agreed to participate (Fig. 1). Twelve patients (n=6 in each group) were lost to follow-up between baseline (pretreatment) measures and the 4-week follow-up. Baseline demographics and data for outcome measures are listed in Table 2.
No significant interaction or main effects of group were found for the primary or secondary outcome measures (Tab. 3). There was a significant main effect (P<.05) of time for the NPRS [Numeric Pain Rating Scale], PSFS [Patient-Specific Functional Scale], NDI [Neck Disability Index], and body diagram, indicating there were significant improvements in pain, function, disability, and symptom distribution regardless of group assignment (MTEX [sham intermittent cervical traction] versus MTEXTraction [intermittent cervical traction]) from baseline to the 4-week follow-up. The adjusted effect size at 4 weeks from the mixed-models analysis for each of the primary outcomes was small (NDI=1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]=–3.8 to 6.8; PSFS=0.3, 95% CI=–1.2 to 1.8; and NPRS=0.5, 95% CI=–1.0 to 2.1).
Discussion (paragraph 2)
Although there were no significant differences between groups with any of the outcome measures, the estimates of the treatment effects were imprecise, and this uncertainty needs to be considered when interpreting the trial results. At the 2-week follow-up, the upper boundary of the adjusted 95% CI for the NDI was 7.0 (Tab. 3). This value meets the threshold for meaningful clinically important change of the NDI (7.0), suggesting that we cannot exclude the possibility of harm in the MTEXTraction group relative to the MTEX group. Similarly, at the 4-week follow-up, the upper boundaries of the adjusted and unadjusted 95% CIs for the NPRS were 2.1 and 1.7, respectively (Tab. 3). These values exceed the threshold for meaningful clinically important change of the NPRS (1.3) and also indicate that we cannot exclude the possibility of harm in the MTEXTraction group. In addition, at the 2-week follow-up, the lower boundaries of the adjusted and unadjusted 95% CIs for the NPRS were –2.1 and –1.6, respectively (Tab. 3). These values, which are greater than the threshold for minimal clinically important difference (MCID), suggest that we cannot exclude the possibility of a clinically important benefit of the MTEXTraction group relative to the MTEX group for the NPRS variable at this specific time point.
References
- Thorpe DL. Letter to the editor on "Manual therapy, exercise, and traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial." Phys Ther. 2009;89:1253.[Free Full Text]
- Young IA. Author response to letter to the editor on "Manual therapy, exercise, and traction for patients with cervical radiculopathy: a randomized controlled trial." Phys Ther. 2009;89:1253.[Free Full Text]
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
Related Article
-
Manual Therapy, Exercise, and Traction for Patients With Cervical Radiculopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- Ian A. Young, Lori A. Michener, Joshua A. Cleland, Arnold J. Aguilera, and Alison R. Snyder
Physical Therapy 2009 89: 632-642.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
Copyright © 2009 by the American Physical Therapy Association.
