You are on page 1of 10

Descriptive statistics :

Table No. 5.1

Genderwise distribution of subjects:

No. of
subjects Percent
Female 25 50.0
Male 25 50.0
Total 50 100.0

Fig. No. 5.1

Genderwise distribution of subjects:

The upper

table

No.5.1 and

Fig. no.5.1

is a pie

chart

which

shows the number of females and males participated in this study. It illustrates that the males

were equal to the females.

Table No. 5.2

42
Age wise distribution of subjects:

No. of
subjects Percent
20 - 25 16 32.0
26 - 30 24 48.0
31 - 35 10 20.0
Total 50 100.0

Fig. No. 5.2

Age wise distribution of subjects:

The above table No. 5.2 represents no. of subjects in each age group and the above Fig. no. 5.2

illustrates the distribution of subjects according to the age. The highest percentage of subjects

was present between 26 – 30 yrs.

43
Table no. 5.3

The mean age of the subjects with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome:

N Mean Median Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum


AGE 50 0 28.00 3.959 20 35

The above table indicates that the total number of subjects participated in the study was 50 and

the median age of the subjects participated in the study is 28.00 with the standard deviation of

3.959.

Inferential statistics:

Table No. 5.4

44
Pre and Post test PFPSQ data:

Std. Mean of
N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation difference t value p value
Pre PFPSQ 50 6.0 9.5 8.010 .8601 4.2500 44.226 .000
Post PFPSQ 50 2 6 3.76 .764 HS

Fig. No. 5.3

Pre and Post test PFPSQ data:

The above table No. 5.4 denotes that Pre test PFPSQ data of subjects with the mean and standard

deviation of (8.010, 0.8601) and the Post test PFPSQ data of subjects with the mean and standard

deviation of (3.76, 0.764). The Paired t test value of Pre and Post test SDQ analysis is 44.226

which are highly significant at 0.000 levels. The fig No. 5.3 represents the Pre and Post mean

value of PFPSQ which shows a greater improvement after intervention of six sessions.

Table No. 5.5

Pre and Post test flexion ROM data:

45
Std. Mean of
N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation difference t value p value
Pre FLEXION 50 65 85 74.10 4.643 -11.720 29.601 .000
Post FLEXION 50 80 90 85.82 2.760 HS

Fig. No. 5.4

Pre and Post test flexion ROM data:

The above table No. 5.5 denotes that Pre test flexion ROM data of subjects with the mean and

standard deviation of (74.10, 4.643) and the Post test flexion ROM data of subjects with the

mean and standard deviation of (85.82, 2.760). The Paired t test value of Pre and Post test flexion

ROM analysis is 29.601 which are highly significant at 0.000 levels. The fig No. 5.4 represents

the Pre and Post mean value of flexion ROM which shows a greater improvement after

intervention of six sessions.

Table No. 5.6

Pre and Post test extension ROM data:


46
Std. Mean of
N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation difference t value p value
Pre EXTENSION 50 60.1 85.1 73.876 5.0072 -12.0298 22.286 .000
Post EXTENSION 50 80 90 85.91 2.771 HS

Fig. No. 5.5

Pre and Post test flexion ROM data:

The above table No. 5.6 denotes that Pre test extension ROM data of subjects with the mean and

standard deviation of (73.876, 5.0072) and the Post test flexion ROM data of subjects with the

mean and standard deviation of (85.91, 2.771). The Paired t test value of Pre and Post test

extension ROM analysis is 22.286 which are highly significant at 0.000 levels. The fig No. 5.4

represents the Pre and Post mean value of extension ROM which shows a greater improvement

after intervention of six sessions.

Table No. 5.7

Pre and Post test Step Test data:

47
Std. M ean of
N M inim um M axim um M ean Deviation difference t valu e p valu e
Pre ST EP T EST 50 7 15 9.38 1.958 -4.160 43.199 .0 00
Post ST EP T EST 50 10 18 13.54 1.887 HS

Fig. No. 5.6

Pre and Post test Step Test data:

The above table no. 5.7 denotes that Pre step test data of subjects with the mean and standard

deviation of (9.38, 1.958) and the Post step test data of subjects with the mean and standard

deviation of (13.54, 1.887). The Paired t test value of Pre and Post step test analysis is 43.199

which are highly significant at 0.000 levels. The fig No. 5.4 represents the Pre and Post mean

value of step test which shows a greater improvement after intervention of six sessions.

Table No. 5.8


48
Analysis of gender variation in PFPSQ, ROM and Step Test after intervention:

Std.
SEX Mean Deviation t value p value
Change in PFPSQ Female 4.2200 .73711 .309 .758
Male 4.2800 .63048 NS
Change in Flexion Female -12.0800 3.05396 .908 .369
Male -11.3600 2.53114 NS
Change in Extention Female -12.0800 3.05396 .908 .369
Male -11.3600 2.53114 NS
Change in Step test Female -4.0000 .57735 1.693 .097
Male -4.3200 .74833 NS

The above table no. 5.8 shows that the mean difference in PFPSQ (pre and post), ROM and step

test between female and male is not significant. The values interprets that there is no difference

in the treatment outcomes in PFPSQ of male and female (p=0.758); in ROM of male and female

(p=0.369) and in step test of male and female (p=0.097). Both the gender responds equally to the

treatment.

49
Fig. No. 5.7

Analysis of gender variation in PFPSQ, ROM and Step Test after intervention:

The above figure shows that there is no difference in the treatment outcomes in PFPSQ, ROM

and step test of male and female and both the gender responds almost equally to the treatment.

Table No. 5.9

50
Correlations

Pearson
p
Correlation
AGE Change in PFPSQ .300 .035 sig
Change in Flexion -.182 .207 NS
Change in Extention -.182 .207 NS
Change in Step test -.014 .925 NS
Change in PFPSQ Change in Flexion -.268 .060 NS
Change in Extention -.268 .060 NS
Change in Step test .022 .879 NS
Change in Flexion Change in Extention .999 .000 HS
Change in Step test .152 .291 NS
Change in Extention Change in Step test .152 .291 NS

The above correlation table no. 5.9 represents that there is a positive correlation between PFPSQ

and age which is significant at 0.35 levels after the intervention. It also interprets that there is a

negative correlation between step test and age and also between ROM and age which are not

significant after the intervention. It shows the negative correlation between the ROM and PFPSQ

which is not significant after the intervention. The table no. 5.9 also indicates that there is a

positive correlation between step test and PFPSQ which is not significant after the intervention.

It also represents a positive correlation between extension ROM and flexion ROM which is

highly significant at 0.000 levels and also a positive correlation between step test and ROM

which is not significant after the intervention. This shows that the change in PFPSQ due to

treatment is moderately affected by age which means more the age more the change (difference:

pre and post), other parameters are not correlated with age. Similarly high change in flexion

leads to high change in extension.

51