by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Chiropractic Journal of Australia : CJA March 2013
Chiropractic Journal of Australia Volume 43 Number 1 March 2013 31 IV. Statistical Analysis All the statistical tests were performed using Statsoft’s package Statistica, version 8.0. To compare distribution of the variable age within the groups with normal distribution Shapiro-Wilk’s W test had been used. Homogeneity of variance was assessed with Levene’s test and fnally t-Student’s test for independent groups was performed. Differences of combined HA and NP complaints between the groups were compared with χ-square test. RESULTS The age distribution in SBO and CRL groups proved to be not different from normal distribution (p<0.01) and the variances of the variable were homogenous. Consequently t-Student’s test was performed, which did not refuse the hypothesis that the variable age was drawn from the same population. Summary of the distribution of the variable age for each group is shown on box and whisker plot (Fig. 2). Fifty percent or more of the patients in both the CRL and SBO groups stated that their main complaint did not involve headache or neck pain. The patients’ complaints were grouped into four categories (Fig. 3). The result of 2 test showed that frequency of HP and NP was not associated with SBO of C1. Detailed results of performed tests are shown in Table 2. Approximately half of the patients included in this study who underwent x-ray examination in the Macquarie University chiropractic outpatient clinics had complained of either HA or NP at the time of initial consultation. There was no statistically signifcant difference between the cumulative rates of HA and NP in patients with SBO of C1 when compared to the control group. DISCUSSION The results of this study support previous conclusions6,11-13 that SBO of C1 is of little clinical signifcance and is most often an incidental fnding. Within the literature review few research papers on SBO at C1 were found. The articles were largely based on a very limited number of cases and for that reason the fnal conclusions cannot be considered representative of the general population. No publications discovered looked specifcally for any association between SBO of the atlas with HA or NP and because of this we do not have a reference point to compare results of our study. There may be various reasons for this lack of research. One possibility is that SBO of C1 may be discovered during SPINA BIFIDA OCCULTA GLOVER et al Figure 3. Frequencies of complaints grouped into four types; SB -- the experimental group; CRL -- the control group. Figure 2. Medians, quantiles, and ranges of variable age in the ex- perimental group (SBO) and the control group (CRL). Table2. Results of performed statistical analyses Group Test's name Result P-level Comment SBO CTR Shapiro-Wilk W W=0.91 W=0.91 P=0.01 P=0.01 The distribution does not differ signifcantly from normal SBO CTR Levene's test F(1,62)=1.34 P=0.25 Hypothesis of homogeneity of variances was not rejected SBO v CRL t-Student's (independent variables) t=0.38 P=0.71 The age of participants does not differ signifcantly between the groups SBO v CRL Chi-square (df=1) x2=0.06 P=0.80 It appears that there is no association between SBO of C1 and HA/NP
CJA December 2012
CJA June 2013