A retrospective analysis of minimally invasive internal fixation versus nonoperative conservative management of pelvic ring fragility fractures and the elderly

Table 5 Comparison of the Majeed functional score between two groups of patients with fragility fractures of the pelvic ring (\(\overline{x} \pm s\), score)

	Number	On admission	1 week	1 month	3 months	6 months	F value	P value
Working
Conservative Group	44	1.0 ± 0.9	2.5 ± 1.2	3.1 ± 0.8	4.3 ± 1.5	12.3 ± 5.8	112.031	< 0.001
Surgical Team	51	1.5 ± 1.1	2.9 ± 1.5	4.2 ± 1.2	6.2 ± 1.9	15.8 ± 4.1	325.065	< 0.001
t value		− 2.400	− 1.423	− 5.168	− 5.348	− 3.430
P value		0.018	0.159	< 0.01	< 0.01	0.01
Pain
Conservative Group	44	8.5 ± 2.6	13.6 ± 1.9	15.3 ± 3.6	21.6 ± 3.5	26.2 ± 2.9	240.670	< 0.001
Surgical Team	51	7.9 ± 2.1	15.7 ± 3.2	22.9 ± 4.2	25.6 ± 2.9	27.2 ± 1.7	375.000	< 0.001
t value		1.244	− 3.949	–9.389	− 0.81	− 2.083
P value		0.217	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.936	0.040
Sitting
Conservative Group	44	3.2 ± 0.9	7.2 ± 0.8	10.8 ± 2.4	15.3 ± 5.6	24.2 ± 1.8	344.065	< 0.001
Surgical Team	51	2.9 ± 1.1	13.5 ± 3.9	20.5 ± 4.5	25.8 ± 3.7	26.8 ± 2.1	457.133	< 0.001
t value		1.440	1.409	− 10.519	− 12.807	− 5.150
P value		0.136	0.162	< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01
Sexuality
Conservative Group	44	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.2 ± 0.1	4.2 ± 1.3	446.729	< 0.001
Surgical Team	51	0.0	0.0	0.0	2.5 ± 0.8	4.5 ± 1.5	368.382	< 0.001
t value		− 6.126	− 6.126	− 6.126	− 6.424	− 2.067
P value		< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01	0.042
Total score
Conservative Group	44	14.1 ± 3.1	25.9 ± 2.6	32.0 ± 4.5	45.7 ± 6.9	75.0 ± 5.9	1007.43	< 0.001
Surgical Team	51	13.9 ± 2.8	34.8 ± 5.4	51.8 ± 6.4	66.2 ± 5.3	82.5 ± 5.2	1368.04	< 0.001
t value		0.496	− 10.034	− 17.635	− 16.72	− 6.586
P value		0.621	< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01	< 0.01

Bold values indicate repeated measurement analysis of variance to compare whether there was any difference at each time point, and P value <0.001 suggested that there was statistical difference

ISSN: 1749-799X