Physical performance: In the experimental
group, most of the physical performance test,
except left knee extension ROM, had significantly
changed over time (Table 2). Comparisons between
different time points reveal significant differences
of the 6-Minute Walk Test-distance (6MWD), right
knee extension peak torque (TRE), left knee
extension peak torque (TLE), right knee flexion
ROM, and left knee flexion ROM at the 12th week
(Table 3 and 5). Right knee extension ROM shows
a significant change at the 8th week but reverts to
non-significant at the 12th week (Table 4). Although
there were some differences of TRE and TLE data
between baseline and the 12th week, no significant
difference between groups was found (Table 6).
The experimental group illustrated medium to large
ES in 6MWD at the 12th week (ES = .704). Small
to medium ES of knee flexion ROM in the experimental
group were examined (ES = .497), but only
small ES in the control group were found (ES = .103).
The experimental group revealed a greater ES in
knee flexion ROM than the control group, in both
knees. In the experimental group, estimated power
for 6MWD, TRE, and TLE were. 84, .88, and .63,
respectively. All estimated power for knee flexion
ROMs were lower than .80.
Physical performance: In the experimentalgroup, most of the physical performance test,except left knee extension ROM, had significantlychanged over time (Table 2). Comparisons betweendifferent time points reveal significant differencesof the 6-Minute Walk Test-distance (6MWD), rightknee extension peak torque (TRE), left kneeextension peak torque (TLE), right knee flexionROM, and left knee flexion ROM at the 12th week(Table 3 and 5). Right knee extension ROM showsa significant change at the 8th week but reverts tonon-significant at the 12th week (Table 4). Althoughthere were some differences of TRE and TLE databetween baseline and the 12th week, no significantdifference between groups was found (Table 6).The experimental group illustrated medium to largeES in 6MWD at the 12th week (ES = .704). Smallto medium ES of knee flexion ROM in the experimentalgroup were examined (ES = .497), but onlysmall ES in the control group were found (ES = .103).The experimental group revealed a greater ES inknee flexion ROM than the control group, in bothknees. In the experimental group, estimated powerfor 6MWD, TRE, and TLE were. 84, .88, and .63,respectively. All estimated power for knee flexionROMs were lower than .80.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..