CHAPTER IV - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4595/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · of...

76

CHAPTER IV

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data

collected. The findings were organized and presented under the following

sections.

Section 4.1 Distribution of study variables

Section 4.2 Effectiveness of OPP on knowledge

Section 4.3 Effectiveness of OPP on self-efficacy

Section 4.3 Effectiveness of OPP on bone mineral density

Section 4.1 Distribution of study variables

Table 4. Percentage distribution of the demographic variables of thefemale school teachers (N=170).

Studygroup(n=85)

Controlgroup(n=85)Sl.

No. VariablesNo. % No. %

2 valuep value

Age (Years)31-35 05 05.9 05 05.9 0.000

1.00036-40 23 27.1 27 31.8 0.320

0.57241-45 49 57.6 46 54.1 0.095

0.758

1.

46-50 08 09.4 07 08.2 0.0670.796

EducationUnder graduate 30 35.3 46 54.1 3.368

0.066Postgraduate 52 61.2 37 43.5 2.528

0.112

2.

Others (M.Phil.) 03 03.5 02 02.4 0.2000.655

77

Marital statusMarried 81 95.3 83 97.6 0.024

0.876

Separated 01 01.2 0 0 -

Widow 01 01.2 0 0 -

3.

Unmarried 02 02.3 02 02.4 0.0001.000

Type of familyNuclear 68 80 76 89.4 0.444

0.505

4.

Joint 17 20 09 10.6 2.4620.117

Type of residenceUrban 32 37.6 31 36.5 0.016

0.900Semi-urban 48 56.5 49 57.6 0.010

0.919

5.

Rural 05 05.9 05 05.9 0.0001.000

Yearly familyincome (Rupees)80,000-1,20,000 11 12.9 11 12.9 0.000

1.0001,20,001-1,60,000 51 60 52 61.2 0.010

0.922

6.

Above 1,60,000 23 27.1 22 25.9 0.0220.881

Table 4 shows the percentage distribution of the demographic variables

of the subjects in both the groups which reveal that majority of the subjects

were in the age group of 41-45 years, 49 (57.6%) in the study group and 46

(54.1%) in the control group. The data regarding educational status shows

that in the study group 52 (61.2%) were postgraduates and in the control

group 46 (54.1%) were undergraduates. Most of the subjects hailed from the

semi-urban area 48 (56.5%) in the study group and 49 (57.6%) in the control

group.

78

5.9 5.9

27.131.8

57.6 54.1

9.4 8.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

%

31-35 years 36-40 years 41-45 years 46-50 years

Figure 3. Percentage distribution of age of the study participants.

Study group

Control group

78

79

12.9 12.9

60 61.2

27.125.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

%

Rs 80000 - 120000 Rs 120001 - 160000 Above Rs 160000

Figure 4. Percentage distribution of yearly family income of the study participants.

Study group

Control group

80

Table 5. Percentage distribution of the personal variables of the female

school teachers (N=170).

Studygroup(n=85)



2 valuep value

Dietary patternVegetarian 45 52.9 51 60 0.375

0.540

1.

Mixed vegetarian 40 47.1 34 40 0.4860.485

No. of childrenNo issues 03 03.5 02 02.4 0.200

0.655

One 24 28.2 32 37.6 1.1430.285

Two 57 67.1 50 58.8 0.4580.499

2.

Three 01 01.2 01 01.2 -

Family history ofosteoporosisNo 81 95.3 82 96.5 0.006

0.938

3.

Yes 04 04.7 03 03.5 0.1430.705

Household activitySedentary 23 27.1 14 16.5 2.189

0.139

Moderate 56 65.8 66 77.6 0.8200.365

4.

Heavy 06 07.1 05 05.9 0.0910.763

Practice of exercisesNo 79 92.9 81 95.3 0.025

0.874

5.

Yes 06 07.1 04 04.7 0.4000.527

81

Studygroup(n=85)



2 valuep value

Body mass indexUnderweight(<18.5 kg/m²)

08 09.4 09 10.6 0.0590.808

Normal(18.5-23 kg/m²)

32 37.7 38 44.7 0.5140.473

Overweight(23.1-25 kg/m²)

42 49.4 35 41.2 0.6360.425

6.

Obesity(>25 kg/m²)

03 03.5 03 03.5 0.0001.000

Table 5 depicts that 45(52.9%) subjects in the study group and

51(60%) subjects in the control group were vegetarians and the remaining 40

(47.1%) in the study group and 34 (40%) in the control group were mixed

vegetarians. Only four (4.7%) subjects in the study group and three (3.5%) in

the control group had family history of osteoporosis, whereas 81(95.3%) and

82(96.5%) subjects in the study and control groups respectively, had no

family history of osteoporosis. Six (7.1%) subjects in the study group and five

(5.9%) in the control group said ‘yes’ to practice of exercises. The data on

body mass index revealed that 42 (49.4%) and 35 (41.2%) subjects in the

study and control groups belonged to overweight category and eight (9.4%)

and nine (10.6%) subjects in the study and control groups belonged to

underweight category.

82

52.9 47.1

60

40

0

20

40

60

80

%

Study group Control group

Figure 5. Percentage distribution of dietary pattern of the study participants.

Vegetarian

Mixed vegetarian

83

7.1 4.7

92.9 95.3

0102030405060708090

100

%

Yes No

Figure 6. Percentage distribution of practice of exercise of the study participants.

Study groupControl group

84

9.4 10.6

37.7 44.7

49.4

41.2

3.5 3.5

0

20

40

60

80

100

%

Under weight Normal Over weight Obesity

Figure 7. Percentage distribution of body mass index of the study participants.

Study group

Control group

85

Section 4.2 Effectiveness of OPP on knowledge

Table 6. Comparison of knowledge on osteoporosis risk factors between

the study and control groups.

Study group Control groupDuration ofthe study Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 1.71 1.31 2.06 1.36 -0.353 1.7080.88

Posttest-I 7.73 1.09 2.28 1.19 5.447 11.3250.000***

Posttest-II 7.94 0.87 2.11 1.2 5.833 11.2800.000***

Posttest-III 7.96 0.81 2.90 1.37 5.059 11.1750.000***

***p<0.001

Table 6 reveals the comparison of knowledge on osteoporosis risk

factors between the study and control groups. In the study group, the mean

value of osteoporosis risk factor knowledge was 1.71 during the pretest,

whereas, an increase in the mean values 7.73, 7.94 and 7.96 was noticed

during posttests-I, II and III respectively. In the control group, the mean value

was 2.06 during the pretest and 2.28, 2.11 and 2.90 in the posttests-I, II and

III respectively. Even though there was an improvement in the mean scores in

the control group, the mean differences were high and the calculated t values

were 11.325, 11.280 and 11.175 with p < 0.001 level which confirmed the

existence of a statistically significant difference between the study and control

groups with relation to knowledge on osteoporosis risk factors.

86

Figure 8. Comparison of knowledge on osteoporosis risk factors between the study andcontrol groups.

1.71

7.73 7.94 7.96

2.06 2.28 2.11

2.9

0

2

4

6

8

10

Pretest Posttest-I Posttest-II Posttest-III

Mea

n ±

SD


86

87

Table 7. Comparison of knowledge on exercises between the study and

control groups

Study group Control groupDurationof thestudy

Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 3.07 1.549 3.44 1.569 -0.365 1.5250.129

Posttest-I 13.88 1.238 3.88 1.257 10.000 52.2390.000***

Posttest-II 13.77 1.172 4.13 1.062 9.640 55.7170.000***

Posttest-III 13.67 1.118 5.49 1.501 8.173 39.4690.000***

***p<0.001

Table 7 illustrates the mean, SD and t-value of knowledge on exercises

of the subjects in both the groups during pretest, posttests- I, II and III. The

pretest mean score was 3.07 in the study group and 3.44 in the control group

whereas the posttest mean scores were 13.88 and 3.88 during posttest-I, 13.77

and 4.13 during posttest-II and 13.67 and 5.49 during posttest-III in the study

and control groups respectively. There was a significant improvement of

knowledge in the study group and the calculated t-value showed the existence

of a statistically significant difference at p< 0.001 between the groups during

the posttests.

88

Figure 9. Comparison of knowledge on exercises between the study and control groups

3.07

13.88 13.77 13.67

3.44 3.88 4.13

5.49

0

4

8

12

16


Mea

n ±

SD

Study group

Control group

89

Table 8. Comparison of knowledge on calcium intake between the study

and control groups

Study group Control groupDurationof thestudy

Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 3.22 1.66 3.34 1.43 -0.118 0.6110.541

Posttest-I 14.06 1.39 3.76 0.89 10.294 11.3920.000***

Posttest-II 13.99 1.30 3.82 0.92 10.167 11.2710.000***

Posttest-III 14.15 1.2 4.59 1.06 9.558 11.1630.000***

***p<0.001

Table 8 portrays the comparison of knowledge on intake of calcium of

the subjects between the groups during pretest, posttests- I, II and III. The

pretest mean scores were 3.22 in the study group and 3.34 in the control

group and statistically there is no significant difference in the pretests. The

posttest calcium intake knowledge mean scores were 14.06 and 3.76 during

posttest-I, 13.99 and 3.82 during posttest-II and 14.15 and 4.59 during

posttest-III in the study and control groups respectively. The mean scores

were higher in the study group than the control group during the posttests and

were also statistically significant at p<0.001.

90

Figure 10. Comparison of knowledge on calcium intake between the study and controlgroups.

3.22

14.06 13.99 14.15

3.34 3.76 3.824.59

0

4

8

12

16


Mea

n ±

SD

Study group

Control group

91

Table 9. Comparison of aspects of knowledge within the study group

during pretest and posttest-III

Pretest Posttest-IIIAspects ofKnowledge Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Osteoporosisrisk factors

1.68 1.293 7.96 0.813 -6.284 7.8580.000***

Exercises 3.02 1.533 13.67 1.118 -10.642 7.8410.000***

Calcium intake 3.17 1.664 14.15 1.295 -10.490 7.8380.000***

***p<0.001

Table 9 explains the comparison of aspects of knowledge with in the

study group. Post-intervention knowledge scores related to osteoporosis risk

factors (7.96), exercises (13.67) and calcium intake (14.15) were higher than

the pretest scores (1.68, 3.02 & 3.17) and the differences were statistically

significant at p<0.001.

92

Table 10. Comparison of aspects of knowledge within the control group


Pretest Posttest-IIIAspects ofKnowledge Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value


2.07 1.377 2.90 1.376 -0.831 3.4850.000***

Exercises 3.40 1.569 5.49 1.501 -2.096 6.9470.000***

Calcium intake 3.34 1.451 4.59 1.060 -1.253 5.1050.000***

***p<0.001

Table 10 presents the comparison of three aspects of knowledge:

osteoporosis risk factors, exercises and calcium intake within the control

group during pretest and posttest-III. The mean scores of all the three aspects

of knowledge showed an improvement than the scores in the pretest and the

calculated t values were statistically significant at p<0.001.

93

Table 11. Repeated measures of the aspects of knowledge over a period of time between the study and control groups.

Pretest Posttest-I Posttest-IIPosttest-III

Study group Controlgroup Study group Control

group Study group Controlgroup Study group Control

group

Aspects ofKnowledge

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

F valuep value


1.68 1.293 2.07 1.377 7.78 1.084 2.28 1.203 7.98 0.851 2.11 1.220 7.96 0.813 2.90 1.376 404.4160.000***

Exercises 3.02 1.533 3.40 1.569 13.94 1.228 3.87 1.207 13.79 1.180 4.12 1.064 13.67 1.118 5.49 1.501 1127.8720.000***

Calcium intake 3.17 1.664 3.34 1.451 14.11 1.396 3.76 0.892 14.02 1.294 3.84 0.904 14.15 1.295 4.59 1.060 1114.6640.000***

***p<0.001

Table 11 explicates the comparison of the three aspects of knowledge between the groups over a period of time from the

pretest to posttest-III. The mean scores of all the aspects of knowledge showed improvement in each test than the previous test in

both the groups but the difference in increase in mean scores between the groups showed an increase in knowledge in the study

group than the control group which was statistically significant at p<0.001.

94

Section 4.3 Effectiveness of OPP on self-efficacy

Table 12. Comparison of perception on exercises between the study and

control groups.

Study group Control groupDuration ofthe study

Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 39.41 9.029 37.13 6.191 2.282 1.9220.56

Posttest-I 79.85 9.871 38.73 6.263 41.118 32.4270.000***

Posttest-II 88.98 9.548 46.13 8.637 42.845 30.4170.000***

Posttest-III 96.21 4.949 50.28 8.307 45.953 42.8860.000***

***p<0.001

Table 12 describes the mean, SD and t-value of perception on

exercises of the subjects in both the groups during pretest, posttests- I, II and

III. The pretest mean score in the study group was 39.41 and in the control

group was 37.13. During posttests- I, II and III the mean scores in the study

group were 79.85, 88.98 and 96.21 respectively whereas in the control group

the posttests mean scores were 38.73, 46.13 and 50.28 respectively. The mean

scores in the study group showed an improvement in the posttests following

the OPP and the t-values depict that statistically significant differences

existed between the study and control groups at p< 0.001.

95

Figure 11. Comparison of perception on exercises between the study and controlgroups.

39.41

79.85

88.98

96.21

37.13 38.7346.13

50.28

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Mea

n ±

SD

Study group

Control group

96

Table 13. Comparison of perception on intake of dietary calcium between

the study and control groups.

Study group Control groupDuration ofthe study Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 47.12 6.042 46.56 10.423 0.553 0.4230.673

Posttest-I 81.52 10.852 46.93 10.507 34.588 21.1110.000***

Posttest-II 90.63 7.615 48.49 7.895 42.138 35.0990.000***

Posttest-III 95.94 4.484 52.16 7.748 43.782 44.1470.000***

***p<0.001

Table 13 shows the mean, SD and t-value of perception on intake of

dietary calcium of the subjects in both the groups during pretest, posttests-I, II

and III. The pretest mean scores in the study and control groups were 47.12

and 46.56 respectively. The mean scores of perception on intake of dietary

calcium of the subjects showed improvement in the study group during the

posttests-I, II and III (81.52, 90.63 and 95.94) than in the control group

(46.93, 48.49 and 52.16). The posttests t-values were 21.111, 35.099 and

44.147 and they confirmed the presence of statistically significant difference

between the study and control groups at p< 0.001.

97

Figure 12. Comparison of perception on intake of dietary calcium between the study andcontrol groups.

47.12

81.52

90.6395.94

46.56 46.93 48.49 52.16

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Mea

n ±

SD


98

Table 14. Percentage distribution of the level of practice of exercises in

the study group.

Poor(< 50%)

Fair(50 -75%)

Good(> 75%)Duration of

the studyNo. % No. % No. %

Posttest-I (n=85)

- - 36 42.4 49 57.6

Posttest-II (n=83)

- - 15 18.1 68 81.9

Posttest-III (n=81)

- - 04 04.9 77 95.1

Table 14 portrays the level of practice of exercises (balancing, weight

bearing, strengthening & resistance exercises) of the subjects in the study

group during the posttests. During posttest-I, 36 (42.4%) of them had fair

practice of exercise and 49 (57.6%) of them had good practice. The posttest –

II and III showed an increase in the number of subjects in the ‘good’ category

with 68 (81.9%) and 77 (95.1%) respectively.

99

Table 15. Comparison of practice of exercises during posttest-I and II in

the study group.

Posttest-I Posttest-IIType ofExercise Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Balancing 10.98 0.765 11.65 0.688 -0.675 6.461

0.000***

Toe walking(weightbearing)

4.75 0.437 4.82 0.387 -0.072 1.228

0.223

Heel walking(weightbearing)

4.55 0.524 4.60 0.540 -0.048 0.601

0.550

Hip(strengthening)

8.71 1.453 9.61 1.324 -0.904 4.840

0.000***

Squat(strengthening)

3.07 0.513 3.29 0.507 -0.217 2.825

0.006**

Wrist(resistance)

3.73 0.607 3.66 0.60 -0.072 0.883

0.380

Spine(resistance)

2.22 0.585 3.35 0.551 -1.133 13.845

0.000***

***p<0.001, **p<0.01

Table 15 displays the comparison of mean scores of practice of

exercises of the subjects in the study group during posttest-I and II. The mean

scores of exercises during posttest –II are higher than that of the mean scores

in the posttest-I and the difference in mean scores of balancing, hip and spine

exercises were statistically significant at p< 0.001 and squat exercise at

p<0.01.

100

Table 16. Comparison of practice of exercises during posttest-I and III in

the study group.

Posttest-I Posttest-IIIType ofExercise Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Balancing 10.98 0.765 11.95 0.218 -0.975 11.5820.000***


4.75 0.437 4.93 0.307 -0.185 3.4920.001**


4.55 0.524 4.75 0.434 -0.198 3.0690.003**

Hip(strengthening)

8.71 1.453 10.19 1.074 -1.506 8.9810.000***


3.07 0.513 3.26 0.587 -0.198 2.3230.023*

Wrist(resistance)

3.73 0.607 3.77 0.481 -0.037 0.4450.658

Spine(resistance)

2.22 0.585 3.10 0.718 -0.901 8.4790.000***

***p<0.001, **p<0.01, *p<0.05

Table 16 presents the comparison of practice of exercises of the

subjects in the study group during posttest-I and III. The mean scores of the

exercises balancing, hip and spine showed an improved scores in the posttest-

III (11.95, 10.19, 3.10) than in the posttest-I (10.98, 8.71, 2.22) and these

differences were statistically significant at p<0.001. A statistically significant

difference at p<0.01 was also noted between the mean scores of toe and heel

walking.

101

Table 17. Comparison of practice of exercises during posttest-II and III

in the study group.

Posttest-II Posttest-IIIType ofExercise Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Balancing 11.65 0.688 11.95 0.218 -0.309 4.1830.000***


4.82 0.387 4.93 0.307 -0.099 1.9160.059


4.60 0.540 4.75 0.434 -0.148 2.3290.022*

Hip(strengthening)

9.61 1.324 10.19 1.074 -0.568 4.6210.000***


3.29 0.507 3.26 0.587 0.025 0.4240.673

Wrist(resistance)

3.66 0.60 3.77 0.481 -0.111 1.7540.083

Spine(resistance)

3.35 0.551 3.10 0.718 0.247 3.1020.003**

***p<0.001, **p<0.01, *p<0.05

Table 17 showcases the mean and SD of the practice of exercises of

the subjects in the study group during the posttest- II and III. The compared

mean values during posttest-II & III of balancing (11.65 & 11.95) and hip

(9.61 & 10.19) exercises showed a statistically significant difference at p<

0.001 and of heel walking (4.60 & 4.75) at p<0.05.

102

Table 18. Overall mean and SD of practice of exercises in the study

group during posttest-I, II & III.

Practice of exercisesDuration of the study

Mean SD

Posttest-I 38.0 3.643

Posttest-II 41.12 3.376

Posttest-III 41.96 2.745

Table 18 reveals the overall mean and SD of practice of exercises

(balancing, weight bearing, strengthening & resistance exercises) of the

subjects in the study group during posttest-I, II and III. The mean scores of

practice of exercises revealed an improvement in the practice during posttest-

II (41.12) & III (41.96) than I (38.0).

103

Figure 13. Comparison of practice of exercises in the study group.

3841.12 41.96

0

10

20

30

40

50

Posttest - I Posttest - II Posttest - III

Mea

n ±

SD

104

Table 19. Comparison of overall practice of exercises in the study group

during posttest-I, II & III.

Practice of exercises

Duration of the studyMean difference

t valuep value

Posttest-I & II -3.120 6.859 0.000***

Posttest-I & III -4.025 9.562 0.000***

Posttest-II & III -0.852 3.707 0.000***

Table 19 depicts the comparison of overall practice of exercises

(balancing, weight bearing, strengthening & resistance exercises) of subjects

in the study group during the three posttests. The mean difference of posttest-

I & II was -3.120 with t value 6.859, posttest-I & III was -4.025 with t value

9.562 and posttest-II & III was -0.852 with t value 3.707 and these differences

showed an improved practice of exercises in the posttest II and III than I,

which was also statistically significant at p<0.001.

105

Table 20. Percentage distribution of the regularity in practice of exercises

in the study group.

Regular 4 days)

Irregular(< 4 days)Duration of the

studyNo. % No. %

Posttest-I (n=85) 54 63.5 31 36.5

Posttest-II (n=83) 68 81.9 15 18.1

Posttest-III (n=81) 71 87.7 10 12.3

Table 20 shows the number of study group subjects in the regular and

irregular practice of exercises. During posttest-II 68 (81.9%) subjects and

during posttest-III 71(87.7%) subjects had regular practice of exercises that

include [balancing, weight bearing (walking, toe walking & heel walking),

strengthening (hip & squat) and resistance (wrist & spine) exercises]. There

was an increase in the number of subjects in the category of regular practice

in the posttest-II than posttest-I and in posttest-III than in posttest-I & II.

106

Table 21. Percentage distribution of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by FFQ method during pre-& posttests

in the study and control groups.


< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

Group

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Study 85 100 - - 85 100 - - 40 48.2 43 51.8 9 11.1 72 88.9

Control 85 100 - - 85 100 - - 84 100 - - 83 100 - -

Table 21 explicates the frequency and percentage distribution of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by FFQ

method by the subjects in the study and control groups. During pre and posttest-I, the dietary calcium intake was less than 600

mg/day for all the subjects in both the groups whereas; during posttest-II 43 (51.8%) and posttest-III 72 (88.9%) subjects had

600 mg of dietary calcium per day in the study group.

107

Table 22. Percentage distribution of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by 24-hours dietary recall method

during pre- & posttests in the study and control groups.


< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

< 600mg/day

600mg/day

Group

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Study 85 100 - - 85 100 - - 51 61.4 32 38.6 22 27.2 59 72.8

Control 85 100 - - 85 100 - - 84 100 - - 83 100 - -

Table 22 elucidates the frequency and percentage distribution of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by 24 hour dietary

recall method by the subjects in the study and control groups. The data reveals that all the subjects in the control group had < 600

mg of dietary calcium per day during pretest and all the posttests. But in the study group an improvement could be noticed as 32

(38.6%) and 59 (72.8%) subjects had 600 mg of dietary calcium per day during posttest-II & III respectively.

108

Table 23. Comparison of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated

by FFQ between the study and control groups.

Study group Control groupDurationof thestudy Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 226.12 60.462 223.55 58.959 2.578 0.2810.779

Posttest-I 273.55 61.102 222.535 55.057 50.667 0.0600.000***

Posttest-II 594.38 101.288 225.318 64.472 369.071 0.0000.000***

Posttest-III 691.61 73.747 239.246 61.604 452.364 0.0390.000***

***p<0.001

Table 23 displays the comparison of practice of dietary calcium intake

estimated by FFQ of the subjects in both the groups during pretest, posttests-

I, II and III. The mean score during pretest in the study group was 226.12 and

in the control group was 223.55. The mean scores during posttests-I, II and III

in the study group were 273.55, 594.38 & 691.61 and in the control group

were 222.535, 225.318 and 239.246 respectively. The t-values obtained

during posttest-I, II & III (0.060, 0.000 and 0.039) resulted in statistically

significant differences at p< 0.001 and it is evident that the intake of dietary

calcium was influenced by OPP in the study group.

109

Figure 14. Comparison of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by FFQbetween the study and control groups.

226.12

273.55

594.38

691.61

223.55 222.53 225.31 239.24

0

200

400

600

800


Mea

n ±

SD

Study group

Control group

110

Table 24. Comparison of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated

by 24-hours dietary recall method between the study and control groups.

Study group Control groupDurationof thestudy Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Pretest 216.848 59.084 214.101 65.083 2.747 0.2880.774

Posttest-I 261.379 63.91 213.712 63.482 47.667 0.5120.000***

Posttest-II

542.727 121.383 214.795 60.372 327.931 0.0000.000***

Posttest-III

665.195 81.911 220.304 58.395 444.891 0.0000.000***

***p<0.001

Table 24 depicts the comparison of practice of dietary calcium intake

of the subjects estimated by 24-hours dietary recall method between the

groups. The pretest mean scores in the study and control groups were 216.848

and 214.101 respectively. The posttests mean scores revealed that the mean

scores in the study group were higher than that of the control group. The

calculated t-values during posttests showed the presence of statistically

significant difference at p< 0.001 between the groups.

111

Figure 15. Comparison of practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by 24 hoursdietary recall between the study and control groups.

216.84261.37

542.72

665.19

241.1213.71 214.79 220.3

0

200

400

600

800


Mea

n ±

SD


112

Table 25. Comparison of aspects of self-efficacy within the study group


Pretest Posttest-IIIAspects ofself-efficacy

Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t value p value

Perception onexercises

39.23 8.921 96.21 4.949 -56.975 47.0610.000***

Perception onintake ofdietarycalcium

46.94 6.059 95.94 4.484 -49.000 58.1570.000***

Intake ofdietarycalcium - FFQ

227.80 60.874 691.610 73.747 -442.105 42.5330.000***

Intake ofdietarycalcium - 24hrs dietaryrecall

218.252 59.671 665.19 81.911 -424.101 38.9390.000***

***p<0.001

Table 25 illustrates the mean scores of the aspects of self-efficacy:

perception on exercises, perception on intake of dietary calcium, practice of

intake of dietary calcium estimated by FFQ method and 24 hrs dietary recall

of the subjects in the study group. The mean scores of the four aspects of self-

efficacy were higher in the posttest-III (96.21, 95.94, 691.610 & 665.19) than

in the pretest (39.23, 46.94, 227.80 & 218.252) and the mean differences were

statistically significant at p<0.001 for all the variables.

113

Table 26. Comparison of aspects of self-efficacy within the control group


Pretest Posttest-IIIAspects ofSelf-efficacy Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value


37.05 6.219 50.28 8.307 -13.229 12.2290.000***

Perception onintake ofdietary calcium

46.30 10.399 52.16 7.748 -5.855 5.9800.000***

Intake ofdietary calcium- FFQ

221.32 57.675 239.246 61.604 -17.928 3.2470.002**

Intake ofdietary calcium- 24 hrs dietaryrecall

212.677 65.089 220.304 58.395 -7.626 38.9390.057

***p<0.001, **p<0.01

Table 26 projects that in the control group the differences in mean

scores of perception on exercises, perception on intake of dietary calcium,

and practice of intake of dietary calcium estimated by FFQ and 24-hours

dietary recall method obtained between the pretest (37.05, 46.30, 221.32 &

212.677) and posttest-III (50.28, 52.16, 239.246 & 220.304) were statistically

significant at p<0.001.

114

Table 27. Repeated measures of the aspects of self-efficacy over a period of time between the study and control groups.


Study group Control group Study group Control group Study group Control group Study group Control groupAspects of Self-efficacy

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

F valuep value


39.23 8.921 37.05 6.219 79.56 9.941 38.69 6.293 88.77 9.562 46.25 8.616 96.21 4.949 50.28 8.307 802.2040.000***

Perception onintake of dietarycalcium intake

46.94 6.059 46.30 10.399 81.81 10.726 46.66 10.488 90.40 7.563 48.35 7.839 95.94 4.484 52.16 7.748 641.7940.000***

Intake of dietarycalcium – FFQ

227.80 60.874 221.32 57.675 275.341 60.935 221.44 55.132 594.19 101.311 225.19 64.85 691.61 73.747 239.24 61.604 861.8170.000***

Intake of dietarycalcium - 24 hrsdietary recall

218.25 59.671 212.67 65.089 263.54 64.225 212.55 63.675 542.48 120.425 214.38 60.621 665.19 81.911 220.30 58.395 657.8830.000***

***p<0.001

Table 27 presents the measurement of aspects of self-efficacy over a period of time from the pretest to posttest-III between

the study and control groups. There was an improvement in the mean scores of all the aspects of self-efficacy in the study group

than the control group which resulted in statistically significant differences at p< 0.001.

115

Section 4.3 Effectiveness of OPP on bone mineral density

Table 28. Percentage distribution of the bone mineral density scores

during posttest-III in the study and control groups.

Study (n=81) Control (n=83) Posttest-IIIBMD score No. % No. %

-1 to -2.5 71 87.7 59 71.1

< -2.5 10 12.3 24 28.9

Table 28 shows the percentage distribution of the subjects in the BMD

score category: -1 to -2.5 (osteopenia) and < -2.5 (osteoporosis) during the

posttest-III. In the study group 71 (87.7%) subjects had BMD score range of -

1 to -2.5 and in the control group, 59 (71.1%) subjects. In the < -2.5 BMD

score range, there were 10 (12.3%) subjects in the study group whereas in the

control group more number of subjects [24 (28.9%)] were noticed to have

osteoporosis.

116

Table 29. Comparison of mean and SD of the bone mineral density

between the study and control groups during pre and posttest-III.

Pretest Posttest-IIIGroup

Mean SD

Meandifference Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Study -1.754 0.44 -1.891 0.51

Control -1.715 0.41-0.039

-2.192 0.440.301

3.9940.000***

***p<0.001

Table 29 explains the comparison of mean and SD values of the bone

mineral density between the study and control groups during the pretest and

posttest-III. The mean BMD of the study group was -1.754 in the pretest and

it was decreased to -1.891 in the posttest-III. In the control group, during

pretest the mean BMD was -1.715 and in the posttest it was decreased further

to -2.192. These differences in the mean scores between the groups showed a

statistical significance at p< 0.001.

117

Table 30. Comparison of bone mineral density within the study and

control groups during pretest and posttest-III

Pretest Posttest-IIIGroup

Mean SD Mean SD

Meandifference

t valuep value

Study -1.754 0.44 -1.891 0.51 0.137 5.0840.000***

Control -1.715 0.41 -2.192 0.44 0.477 17.6630.000***

***p<0.001

Table 30 gives the details of mean, SD and t values of both the groups.

The comparison of mean scores within the groups showed that the mean

BMD scores decreased in the study and control groups (-1.891 & -2.192) than

that of their respective pretest BMD scores (-1.754 & -1.715). The calculated

t values yielded a statistically significant difference at p<0.001 in both the

groups.

118

Figure 16. Comparison of bone mineral density of the study participants in pretestand posttest-III.

-1.754 -1.715-1.891

-2.192

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0Study group Control group

Mea

n ±

SD

Pretest Posttest-III

CHAPTER IV - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4595/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · of...

Documents

Transcript of CHAPTER IV - Shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4595/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · of...