Table 2

Anthropometry, bone mineral parameters and biomechanical calculations of femoral neck.


Intervention
control
p-value

     Baseline
(N = 42)
(N = 43)


Total body



Weight (kg)
27.8 (5.4)
26.5 (4.3)
0.22
Height (cm)
128.8 (5.1)
128.7 (7.5)
0.94
Lean mass (kg)
20.1 (2.3)
20.0 (2.6)
0.90
Fat mass (kg)
5.3 (3.7)
4.5 (2.4)
0.28
Femoral neck



BMC (g)
2.524 (0.468)
2.536 (0.497)
0.91
BMD (g/cm2)
0.722 (0.091)
0.701 (0.090)
0.30
Cross-sectional area (CSA, cm2)
0.909 (0.141)
0.889 (0.152)
0.54
Periosteal width (cm)
2.424 (0.162)
2.463 (0.225)
0.37
Section modulus (Z, cm3)
0.279 (0.064)
0.272 (0.082)
0.66
Cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI, cm4)
0.341 (0.096)
0.338 (0.130)
0.90




     Follow-Up
(N = 42)
(N = 43)


Total body



Weight (kg)
35.6 (8.0)
32.5 (5.7)
0.04
Height (cm)
141.0 (6.5)
139.7 (8.0)
0.45
Lean mass (kg)
24.6 (3.5)
23.6 (3.0)
0.18
Fat mass (kg)
8.9 (5.8)
6.3 (3.4)
0.01
Femoral neck



BMC (g)
3.146 (0.506)
3.030 (0.518)
0.30
BMD (g/cm2)
0.803 (0.080)
0.789 (0.103)
0.50
Cross-sectional area (CSA, cm2)
1.100 (0.175)
1.067 (0.187)
0.41
Periosteal width (cm)
2.640 (0.226)
2.593 (0.190)
0.30
Section modulus (Z, cm3)
0.377 (0.085)
0.368 (0.099)
0.66
Cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI, cm4)
0.506 (0.154)
0.483 (0.159)
0.49




     Annual Changes
(N = 42)
(N = 43)


Total body



Weight (kg)
3.9 (1.6)
3.0 (1.1)
0.006
Height (cm)
6.0 (1.1)
5.6 (0.9)
0.06
Lean mass (kg)
2.3 (0.8)
1.8 (0.5)
0.003
Fat mass (kg)
1.8 (1.3)
0.9 (0.7)
0.001
Femoral neck



BMC (g)
0.310 (0.234)
0.252 (0.236)
0.25
BMD (g/cm2)
0.040 (0.033)
0.045 (0.042)
0.62
Cross-sectional area (CSA, cm2)
0.095 (0.065)
0.091 (0.078)
0.77
Periosteal width (cm)
0.107 (0.107)
0.067 (0.113)
0.10
Section modulus (Z, cm3)
0.049 (0.030)
0.049 (0.042)
0.98
Cross-sectional moment of inertia (CSMI, cm4)
0.082 (0.057)
0.074 (0.067)
0.54

Comparison between the intervention group (n = 42) and the control group (n = 43) in anthropometrics, bone mineral parameters and biomechanical calculations in femoral neck at baseline, at two year follow-up and in annual changes during the follow-up period. Data presented as mean ± SD.

Alwis et al. Dynamic Medicine 2008 7:8   doi:10.1186/1476-5918-7-8