Frequencies

Frequency Table

Age_grp

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 30-40 5 14.3 14.3 14.3
41-50 10 28.6 28.6 42.9
51-60 10 28.6 28.6 71.4
61-70 8 22.9 22.9 94.3
>70 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Age_grp2

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid <=40 5 14.3 14.3 14.3
41-60 20 57.1 57.1 71.4
>60 10 28.6 28.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

sex

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Male 16 45.7 45.7 45.7
Female 19 54.3 54.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

occupation

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid B 8 22.9 22.9 22.9
hw 18 51.4 51.4 74.3
L 4 11.4 11.4 85.7
s 4 11.4 11.4 97.1
st 1 2.9 2.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

side

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Lt 11 31.4 31.4 31.4
Rt 24 68.6 68.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

dominent

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid Rt 35 100.0 100.0 100.0

Trauma

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 17 48.6 48.6 48.6
1 18 51.4 51.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 mode of injury

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 17 48.6 48.6 48.6
bike fall 3 8.6 8.6 57.1
ground fall 6 17.1 17.1 74.3
heavy wt 1 2.9 2.9 77.1
jerk 6 17.1 17.1 94.3
stairs fall 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

onset

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid gr 17 48.6 48.6 48.6
s 18 51.4 51.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Duration_grp

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1-3 13 37.1 37.1 37.1
3-6 6 17.1 17.1 54.3
6-12 5 14.3 14.3 68.6
12-18 4 11.4 11.4 80.0
18-24 3 8.6 8.6 88.6
>=24 4 11.4 11.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

night pain

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 26 74.3 74.3 74.3
1 9 25.7 25.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

radiation

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 22 62.9 62.9 62.9
1 13 37.1 37.1 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Diabetes

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 28 80.0 80.0 80.0
1 7 20.0 20.0 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Hypertension

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 23 65.7 65.7 65.7
1 12 34.3 34.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 Cervical spondylosis

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

wasting of muscles

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 20 57.1 57.1 57.1
1 15 42.9 42.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

glenohumeral joint tenderness

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 2 5.7 5.7 5.7
1 33 94.3 94.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

glenohumeral joint crepitus

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 24 68.6 68.6 68.6
1 11 31.4 31.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

acromioclavicular joint tenderness

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 15 42.9 42.9 42.9
1 20 57.1 57.1 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

previous h/o steroid injection

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 25 71.4 71.4 71.4
1 10 28.6 28.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

NSAIDs

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 35 100.0 100.0 100.0

Physiotherapy

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 1 35 100.0 100.0 100.0

Intra-articular steroid injection

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 28 80.0 80.0 80.0
1 7 20.0 20.0 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 pain score(15)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 5 8 22.9 22.9 22.9
10 23 65.7 65.7 88.6
15 4 11.4 11.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

activity lavel(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 2 1 2.9 2.9 2.9
5 6 17.1 17.1 20.0
6 18 51.4 51.4 71.4
10 10 28.6 28.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

positioning(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 6 5 14.3 14.3 14.3
8 5 14.3 14.3 28.6
10 25 71.4 71.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

forward flexion(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 4 7 20.0 20.0 20.0
6 5 14.3 14.3 34.3
8 18 51.4 51.4 85.7
10 5 14.3 14.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

abduction(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 2 4 11.4 11.4 11.4
4 8 22.9 22.9 34.3
6 3 8.6 8.6 42.9
8 14 40.0 40.0 82.9
10 6 17.1 17.1 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

external rotation(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 2 2 5.7 5.7 5.7
4 8 22.9 22.9 28.6
6 18 51.4 51.4 80.0
8 7 20.0 20.0 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

internal rotation(10)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 2 6 17.1 17.1 17.1
4 5 14.3 14.3 31.4
6 18 51.4 51.4 82.9
8 6 17.1 17.1 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 Strength_Abd_grp

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid >20 8 22.9 22.9 22.9
16-20 11 31.4 31.4 54.3
11-15 6 17.1 17.1 71.4
6-10 2 5.7 5.7 77.1
<6 8 22.9 22.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

neer's impingement test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 10 28.6 28.6 28.6
1 25 71.4 71.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Hawkin's &amp; kennedy test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 12 34.3 34.3 34.3
1 23 65.7 65.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Job's test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 14 40.0 40.0 40.0
1 21 60.0 60.0 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Drop Arm test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 32 91.4 91.4 91.4
1 3 8.6 8.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Patte;s test(resisted ext rotation)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 30 85.7 85.7 85.7
1 5 14.3 14.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Gerber's lift off test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 26 74.3 74.3 74.3
1 9 25.7 25.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Speed test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 23 65.7 65.7 65.7
1 12 34.3 34.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 Yergason's test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 23 65.7 65.7 65.7
1 12 34.3 34.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

instability test

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 34 97.1 97.1 97.1
1 1 2.9 2.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

osteoarthritic changes shoulder joint

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Degenerative changes at GT

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Supraspinatus tendon calcification

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Subacromial spur

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 34 97.1 97.1 97.1
1 1 2.9 2.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 25 71.4
1 10 28.6

Total 35 100.0

Gr-II supraspinatus tear

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 30 85.7 85.7 85.7
1 5 14.3 14.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 Supraspinatus tendinopathy

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 23 65.7 65.7 65.7
1 12 34.3 34.3 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Supraspinatus tendinitis

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 34 97.1 97.1 97.1
1 1 2.9 2.9 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor tendinopathy

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 35 100.0 100.0 100.0

Subscapular tendinopathy

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 29 82.9 82.9 82.9
1 6 17.1 17.1 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Biceps tendinitis

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 31 88.6 88.6 88.6
1 4 11.4 11.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

bicepital tendinopathy

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 24 68.6 68.6 68.6
1 11 31.4 31.4 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Bursitis

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Fluid in RC interval

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 32 91.4 91.4 91.4
1 3 8.6 8.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder)

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 33 94.3 94.3 94.3
1 2 5.7 5.7 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
 Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

Valid 0 32 91.4 91.4 91.4
1 3 8.6 8.6 100.0
Total 35 100.0 100.0
Crosstabs

neer's impingement test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
neer's impingement test 0 6 4 10
1 1 24 25
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .615 .153 3.742 .000
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Hawkin's & kennedy test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Hawkin's &amp; kennedy test 0 7 5 12
1 0 23 23
Total 7 28 35
 Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .648 .136 4.095 .000
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Job's test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Job's test 0 7 7 14
1 0 21 21
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .545 .137 3.623 .000
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Drop Arm test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Drop Arm test 0 7 25 32
1 0 3 3
Total 7 28 35
 Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .046 .031 .906 .365
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Patte;s test(resisted ext rotation) * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Patte;s test(resisted ext rotation) 0 7 23 30
1 0 5 5
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .080 .044 1.208 .227
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Gerber's lift off test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

 Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Gerber's lift off test 0 7 19 26
1 0 9 9
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .159 .071 1.740 .082
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Speed test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Speed test 0 7 16 23
1 0 12 12
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .231 .091 2.137 .033
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Yergason's test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

 Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Yergason's test 0 7 16 23
1 0 12 12
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .231 .091 2.137 .033
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

instability test * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
instability test 0 7 27 34
1 0 1 1
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .015 .015 .507 .612
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
osteoarthritic changes shoulder joint * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
osteoarthritic changes shoulder 0 7 26 33
joint
1 0 2 2
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .030 .023 .728 .466
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Degenerative changes at GT * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Degenerative changes at GT 0 7 26 33
1 0 2 2
Total 7 28 35
 Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .030 .023 .728 .466
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Supraspinatus tendon calcification * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Supraspinatus tendon 0 7 26 33
calcification
1 0 2 2
Total 7 28 35

Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .030 .023 .728 .466
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Subacromial spur * Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

Crosstab
Count

Shoulder_lesion_Elastography

0 1 Total
Subacromial spur 0 7 27 34
1 0 1 1
Total 7 28 35
 Symmetric Measures

Value Asymp. Std. Errora Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.

Measure of Agreement Kappa .015 .015 .507 .612
N of Valid Cases 35

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
Crosstabs

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 6 15 4 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 24.0% 60.0% 16.0% 100.0%
1 Count 2 8 0 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 20.0% 80.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.085a 2 .353
Likelihood Ratio 3.161 2 .206
Linear-by-Linear Association .303 1 .582
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 3 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.14.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * activity lavel(10)

 Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 1 6 10 8 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 4.0% 24.0% 40.0% 32.0% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 8 2 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear .0% .0% 80.0% 20.0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.382a 3 .146
Likelihood Ratio 7.140 3 .068
Linear-by-Linear Association .010 1 .921
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 3 5 17 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 12.0% 20.0% 68.0% 100.0%
1 Count 2 0 8 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 20.0% .0% 80.0% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.464a 2 .292
Likelihood Ratio 3.805 2 .149
Linear-by-Linear Association .021 1 .885
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.43.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 4 4 13 4 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 16.0% 16.0% 52.0% 16.0% 100.0%
1 Count 3 1 5 1 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 30.0% 10.0% 50.0% 10.0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.066a 3 .785
Likelihood Ratio 1.040 3 .792
Linear-by-Linear Association .588 1 .443
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.43.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * abduction(10)

 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 3 7 3 7 5 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 12.0% 28.0% 12.0% 28.0% 20.0% 100.0%
1 Count 1 1 0 7 1 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 10.0% 10.0% .0% 70.0% 10.0% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.804a 4 .214
Likelihood Ratio 6.537 4 .162
Linear-by-Linear Association .795 1 .373
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 8 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .86.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 2 6 11 6 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 8.0% 24.0% 44.0% 24.0% 100.0%
1 Count 0 2 7 1 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear .0% 20.0% 70.0% 10.0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.489a 3 .477
Likelihood Ratio 3.083 3 .379
Linear-by-Linear Association .039 1 .843
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 0 Count 4 5 12 4 25
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 16.0% 20.0% 48.0% 16.0% 100.0%
1 Count 2 0 6 2 10
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 20.0% .0% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Gr-1 supraspinatus tear 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.333a 3 .506
Likelihood Ratio 3.688 3 .297
Linear-by-Linear Association .197 1 .657
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.43.

Gr-1 supraspinatus tear * Strength_Abd_grp

 Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Gr-1 0 Count 6 7 4 1 7 25
supraspinatus
% within Gr-1 24.0% 28.0% 16.0% 4.0% 28.0% 100.0%
tear
supraspinatus tear
1 Count 2 4 2 1 1 10
% within Gr-1 20.0% 40.0% 20.0% 10.0% 10.0% 100.0%
supraspinatus tear
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Gr-1 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
supraspinatus tear

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.906a 4 .753
Likelihood Ratio 2.022 4 .732
Linear-by-Linear Association .376 1 .540
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 6 20 4 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 20.0% 66.7% 13.3% 100.0%
1 Count 2 3 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 40.0% 60.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.446a 2 .485
Likelihood Ratio 1.899 2 .387
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.403 1 .236
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 1 5 14 10 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 3.3% 16.7% 46.7% 33.3% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 4 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear .0% 20.0% 80.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.787a 3 .426
Likelihood Ratio 4.232 3 .237
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.418 1 .234
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .14.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * positioning(10)

 Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 4 3 23 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 13.3% 10.0% 76.7% 100.0%
1 Count 1 2 2 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.640a 2 .162
Likelihood Ratio 3.036 2 .219
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.473 1 .225
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .71.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus 0 Count 5 5 15 5 30
tear
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 16.7% 16.7% 50.0% 16.7% 100.0%
1 Count 2 0 3 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 40.0% .0% 60.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.917a 3 .405
Likelihood Ratio 4.112 3 .250
Linear-by-Linear Association .979 1 .322
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .71.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Gr-II 0 Count 3 5 3 13 6 30
supraspinatus
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 10.0% 16.7% 10.0% 43.3% 20.0% 100.0%
tear
1 Count 1 3 0 1 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 20.0% 60.0% .0% 20.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.979a 4 .201
Likelihood Ratio 6.420 4 .170
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.953 1 .047
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * external rotation(10)

 Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 2 5 16 7 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 6.7% 16.7% 53.3% 23.3% 100.0%
1 Count 0 3 2 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear .0% 60.0% 40.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.169a 3 .160
Likelihood Ratio 5.565 3 .135
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.860 1 .173
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 5 3 16 6 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 16.7% 10.0% 53.3% 20.0% 100.0%
1 Count 1 2 2 0 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.876a 3 .275
Likelihood Ratio 4.013 3 .260
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.483 1 .223
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .71.

Gr-II supraspinatus tear * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Gr-II supraspinatus tear 0 Count 8 9 6 1 6 30
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 26.7% 30.0% 20.0% 3.3% 20.0% 100.0%
1 Count 0 2 0 1 2 5
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear .0% 40.0% .0% 20.0% 40.0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Gr-II supraspinatus tear 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.303a 4 .258
Likelihood Ratio 6.507 4 .164
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.951 1 .162
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * pain score(15)

 Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 5 15 3 23
% within Supraspinatus 21.7% 65.2% 13.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 3 8 1 12
% within Supraspinatus 25.0% 66.7% 8.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Supraspinatus 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .192a 2 .908
Likelihood Ratio .200 2 .905
Linear-by-Linear Association .148 1 .701
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 3 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.37.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 0 3 14 6 23
% within Supraspinatus .0% 13.0% 60.9% 26.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 3 4 4 12
% within Supraspinatus 8.3% 25.0% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Supraspinatus 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.882a 3 .275
Likelihood Ratio 4.156 3 .245
Linear-by-Linear Association .046 1 .831
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 4 3 16 23
% within Supraspinatus 17.4% 13.0% 69.6% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 2 9 12
% within Supraspinatus 8.3% 16.7% 75.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Supraspinatus 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .558a 2 .757
Likelihood Ratio .599 2 .741
Linear-by-Linear Association .303 1 .582
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.71.
Supraspinatus tendinopathy * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 6 3 10 4 23
% within Supraspinatus 26.1% 13.0% 43.5% 17.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 2 8 1 12
% within Supraspinatus 8.3% 16.7% 66.7% 8.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Supraspinatus 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.593a 3 .459
Likelihood Ratio 2.797 3 .424
Linear-by-Linear Association .431 1 .511
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.71.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * abduction(10)

 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 2 7 0 10 4 23
% within Supraspinatus 8.7% 30.4% .0% 43.5% 17.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 2 1 3 4 2 12
% within Supraspinatus 16.7% 8.3% 25.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Supraspinatus 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.079a 4 .089
Likelihood Ratio 9.041 4 .060
Linear-by-Linear Association .013 1 .908
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 8 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.03.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 1 6 11 5 23
% within Supraspinatus 4.3% 26.1% 47.8% 21.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 2 7 2 12
% within Supraspinatus 8.3% 16.7% 58.3% 16.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Supraspinatus 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .796a 3 .850
Likelihood Ratio .801 3 .849
Linear-by-Linear Association .016 1 .900
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .69.

Supraspinatus tendinopathy * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 5 3 10 5 23
% within Supraspinatus 21.7% 13.0% 43.5% 21.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 2 8 1 12
% within Supraspinatus 8.3% 16.7% 66.7% 8.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Supraspinatus 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.550a 3 .466
Likelihood Ratio 2.730 3 .435
Linear-by-Linear Association .081 1 .775
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.71.
Supraspinatus tendinopathy * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Supraspinatus tendinopathy 0 Count 5 7 4 2 5 23
% within Supraspinatus 21.7% 30.4% 17.4% 8.7% 21.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 3 4 2 0 3 12
% within Supraspinatus 25.0% 33.3% 16.7% .0% 25.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Supraspinatus 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.140a 4 .888
Likelihood Ratio 1.775 4 .777
Linear-by-Linear Association .048 1 .826
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .69.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * pain score(15)

 Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 8 22 4 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 23.5% 64.7% 11.8% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .537a 2 .764
Likelihood Ratio .855 2 .652
Linear-by-Linear Association .040 1 .842
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 1 6 17 10 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 2.9% 17.6% 50.0% 29.4% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .972a 3 .808
Likelihood Ratio 1.358 3 .715
Linear-by-Linear Association .165 1 .685
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .03.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 5 5 24 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 14.7% 14.7% 70.6% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% 100.0% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .412a 2 .814
Likelihood Ratio .685 2 .710
Linear-by-Linear Association .346 1 .556
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .14.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * forward flexion(10)

 Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 7 5 17 5 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 20.6% 14.7% 50.0% 14.7% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .972a 3 .808
Likelihood Ratio 1.358 3 .715
Linear-by-Linear Association .173 1 .678
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .14.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 4 8 3 13 6 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 11.8% 23.5% 8.8% 38.2% 17.6% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 0 1 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.544a 4 .819
Likelihood Ratio 1.877 4 .758
Linear-by-Linear Association .302 1 .583
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .09.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 2 8 17 7 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 5.9% 23.5% 50.0% 20.6% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .972a 3 .808
Likelihood Ratio 1.358 3 .715
Linear-by-Linear Association .032 1 .858
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .06.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * internal rotation(10)

 Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 6 5 18 5 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 17.6% 14.7% 52.9% 14.7% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 0 1 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% .0% .0% 100.0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.975a 3 .174
Likelihood Ratio 3.675 3 .299
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.917 1 .166
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .14.

Supraspinatus tendinitis * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Supraspinatus tendinitis 0 Count 8 10 6 2 8 34
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 23.5% 29.4% 17.6% 5.9% 23.5% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 0 0 0 1
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis .0% 100.0% .0% .0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Supraspinatus tendinitis 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.246a 4 .691
Likelihood Ratio 2.380 4 .666
Linear-by-Linear Association .259 1 .611
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .06.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 8 23 4 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * activity lavel(10)

 Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 1 6 18 10 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 5 5 25 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 7 5 18 5 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * abduction(10)

 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 2 8 18 7 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 6 5 18 6 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Infraspinatus & teres minor tendinopathy * Strength_Abd_grp

 Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor 0 Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
tendinopathy
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Infraspinatus &amp; 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
teres minor tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .a
N of Valid Cases 35
a. No statistics are computed because
Infraspinatus &amp; teres minor
tendinopathy is a constant.

Subscapular tendinopathy * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 6 19 4 29
% within Subscapular 20.7% 65.5% 13.8% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 2 4 0 6
% within Subscapular 33.3% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Subscapular 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.176a 2 .555
Likelihood Ratio 1.819 2 .403
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.023 1 .312
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .69.

Subscapular tendinopathy * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 1 3 16 9 29
% within Subscapular 3.4% 10.3% 55.2% 31.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 3 2 1 6
% within Subscapular .0% 50.0% 33.3% 16.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Subscapular 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.587a 3 .133
Likelihood Ratio 4.693 3 .196
Linear-by-Linear Association .751 1 .386
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Subscapular tendinopathy * positioning(10)

 Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 5 3 21 29
% within Subscapular 17.2% 10.3% 72.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 2 4 6
% within Subscapular .0% 33.3% 66.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Subscapular 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.897a 2 .235
Likelihood Ratio 3.356 2 .187
Linear-by-Linear Association .120 1 .729
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .86.

Subscapular tendinopathy * forward flexion(10)

 Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 7 3 14 5 29
% within Subscapular 24.1% 10.3% 48.3% 17.2% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 2 4 0 6
% within Subscapular .0% 33.3% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Subscapular 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.649a 3 .199
Likelihood Ratio 6.271 3 .099
Linear-by-Linear Association .034 1 .854
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .86.

Subscapular tendinopathy * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 3 7 2 11 6 29
% within Subscapular 10.3% 24.1% 6.9% 37.9% 20.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 1 1 1 3 0 6
% within Subscapular 16.7% 16.7% 16.7% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Subscapular 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.271a 4 .686
Likelihood Ratio 3.176 4 .529
Linear-by-Linear Association .340 1 .560
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 8 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .51.

Subscapular tendinopathy * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 2 6 14 7 29
% within Subscapular 6.9% 20.7% 48.3% 24.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 2 4 0 6
% within Subscapular .0% 33.3% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Subscapular 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.537a 3 .469
Likelihood Ratio 4.003 3 .261
Linear-by-Linear Association .401 1 .527
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.
Subscapular tendinopathy * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 6 4 13 6 29
% within Subscapular 20.7% 13.8% 44.8% 20.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 1 5 0 6
% within Subscapular .0% 16.7% 83.3% .0% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Subscapular 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.945a 3 .267
Likelihood Ratio 5.796 3 .122
Linear-by-Linear Association .170 1 .680
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (87.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .86.

Subscapular tendinopathy * Strength_Abd_grp

 Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Subscapular tendinopathy 0 Count 8 9 4 2 6 29
% within Subscapular 27.6% 31.0% 13.8% 6.9% 20.7% 100.0%
tendinopathy
1 Count 0 2 2 0 2 6
% within Subscapular .0% 33.3% 33.3% .0% 33.3% 100.0%
tendinopathy
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Subscapular 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
tendinopathy

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.532a 4 .473
Likelihood Ratio 5.003 4 .287
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.149 1 .284
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.

Biceps tendinitis * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 8 19 4 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 25.8% 61.3% 12.9% 100.0%
1 Count 0 4 0 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.356a 2 .308
Likelihood Ratio 3.623 2 .163
Linear-by-Linear Association .174 1 .677
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .46.

Biceps tendinitis * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 1 6 17 7 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 3.2% 19.4% 54.8% 22.6% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 3 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% .0% 25.0% 75.0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.924a 3 .177
Likelihood Ratio 4.935 3 .177
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.511 1 .034
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Biceps tendinitis * positioning(10)

 Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 5 5 21 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 16.1% 16.1% 67.7% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 4 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% .0% 100.0% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.806a 2 .405
Likelihood Ratio 2.893 2 .235
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.519 1 .218
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Biceps tendinitis * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 7 5 15 4 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 22.6% 16.1% 48.4% 12.9% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 3 1 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% .0% 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.399a 3 .494
Likelihood Ratio 3.653 3 .302
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.002 1 .157
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Biceps tendinitis * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 4 8 2 12 5 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 12.9% 25.8% 6.5% 38.7% 16.1% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 1 2 1 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% .0% 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.246a 4 .518
Likelihood Ratio 4.168 4 .384
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.325 1 .250
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.

Biceps tendinitis * external rotation(10)

 Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 2 8 15 6 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 6.5% 25.8% 48.4% 19.4% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 3 1 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% .0% 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.835a 3 .607
Likelihood Ratio 2.915 3 .405
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.063 1 .302
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .23.

Biceps tendinitis * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 6 4 16 5 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 19.4% 12.9% 51.6% 16.1% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 2 1 4
% within Biceps tendinitis .0% 25.0% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.302a 3 .729
Likelihood Ratio 1.908 3 .592
Linear-by-Linear Association .481 1 .488
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .57.

Biceps tendinitis * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Biceps tendinitis 0 Count 5 11 5 2 8 31
% within Biceps tendinitis 16.1% 35.5% 16.1% 6.5% 25.8% 100.0%
1 Count 3 0 1 0 0 4
% within Biceps tendinitis 75.0% .0% 25.0% .0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Biceps tendinitis 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.244a 4 .083
Likelihood Ratio 8.885 4 .064
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.176 1 .075
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .23.

bicepital tendinopathy * pain score(15)

 Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 6 14 4 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 25.0% 58.3% 16.7% 100.0%
1 Count 2 9 0 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 18.2% 81.8% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.620a 2 .270
Likelihood Ratio 3.788 2 .150
Linear-by-Linear Association .215 1 .642
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 3 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.26.

bicepital tendinopathy * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 1 5 10 8 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 4.2% 20.8% 41.7% 33.3% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 8 2 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy .0% 9.1% 72.7% 18.2% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.086a 3 .379
Likelihood Ratio 3.429 3 .330
Linear-by-Linear Association .170 1 .680
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .31.

bicepital tendinopathy * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 2 4 18 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 8.3% 16.7% 75.0% 100.0%
1 Count 3 1 7 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 27.3% 9.1% 63.6% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.333a 2 .311
Likelihood Ratio 2.192 2 .334
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.268 1 .260
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.57.

bicepital tendinopathy * forward flexion(10)

 Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 5 3 11 5 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 20.8% 12.5% 45.8% 20.8% 100.0%
1 Count 2 2 7 0 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 18.2% 18.2% 63.6% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.953a 3 .399
Likelihood Ratio 4.411 3 .220
Linear-by-Linear Association .356 1 .551
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.57.

bicepital tendinopathy * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 2 6 2 10 4 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 8.3% 25.0% 8.3% 41.7% 16.7% 100.0%
1 Count 2 2 1 4 2 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 18.2% 18.2% 9.1% 36.4% 18.2% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .862a 4 .930
Likelihood Ratio .823 4 .935
Linear-by-Linear Association .100 1 .752
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 8 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .94.

bicepital tendinopathy * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 2 4 12 6 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 8.3% 16.7% 50.0% 25.0% 100.0%
1 Count 0 4 6 1 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy .0% 36.4% 54.5% 9.1% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.182a 3 .364
Likelihood Ratio 3.828 3 .281
Linear-by-Linear Association .413 1 .521
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .63.

bicepital tendinopathy * internal rotation(10)

 Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 4 4 11 5 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 16.7% 16.7% 45.8% 20.8% 100.0%
1 Count 2 1 7 1 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 18.2% 9.1% 63.6% 9.1% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.385a 3 .709
Likelihood Ratio 1.468 3 .690
Linear-by-Linear Association .042 1 .837
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is 1.57.

bicepital tendinopathy * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

bicepital tendinopathy 0 Count 6 6 6 1 5 24
% within bicepital tendinopathy 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 4.2% 20.8% 100.0%
1 Count 2 5 0 1 3 11
% within bicepital tendinopathy 18.2% 45.5% .0% 9.1% 27.3% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within bicepital tendinopathy 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.364a 4 .359
Likelihood Ratio 6.061 4 .195
Linear-by-Linear Association .041 1 .839
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .63.

Bursitis * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 7 22 4 33
% within Bursitis 21.2% 66.7% 12.1% 100.0%
1 Count 1 1 0 2
% within Bursitis 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Bursitis 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.006a 2 .605
Likelihood Ratio 1.077 2 .584
Linear-by-Linear Association .930 1 .335
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .23.

Bursitis * activity lavel(10)

 Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 1 5 18 9 33
% within Bursitis 3.0% 15.2% 54.5% 27.3% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 0 1 2
% within Bursitis .0% 50.0% .0% 50.0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Bursitis 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.828a 3 .419
Likelihood Ratio 3.424 3 .331
Linear-by-Linear Association .191 1 .662
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .06.

Bursitis * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 5 4 24 33
% within Bursitis 15.2% 12.1% 72.7% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 1 2
% within Bursitis .0% 50.0% 50.0% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Bursitis 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.333a 2 .311
Likelihood Ratio 1.931 2 .381
Linear-by-Linear Association .020 1 .888
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Bursitis * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 7 5 16 5 33
% within Bursitis 21.2% 15.2% 48.5% 15.2% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 2 0 2
% within Bursitis .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Bursitis 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.003a 3 .572
Likelihood Ratio 2.774 3 .428
Linear-by-Linear Association .356 1 .551
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Bursitis * abduction(10)
 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 3 8 3 13 6 33
% within Bursitis 9.1% 24.2% 9.1% 39.4% 18.2% 100.0%
1 Count 1 0 0 1 0 2
% within Bursitis 50.0% .0% .0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Bursitis 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.845a 4 .427
Likelihood Ratio 3.629 4 .459
Linear-by-Linear Association .753 1 .386
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Bursitis * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 2 7 17 7 33
% within Bursitis 6.1% 21.2% 51.5% 21.2% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 1 0 2
% within Bursitis .0% 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Bursitis 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.230a 3 .746
Likelihood Ratio 1.580 3 .664
Linear-by-Linear Association .413 1 .521
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Bursitis * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Bursitis 0 Count 6 4 17 6 33
% within Bursitis 18.2% 12.1% 51.5% 18.2% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 1 0 2
% within Bursitis .0% 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Bursitis 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.622a 3 .454
Likelihood Ratio 2.604 3 .457
Linear-by-Linear Association .079 1 .779
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Bursitis * Strength_Abd_grp
 Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Bursitis 0 Count 7 11 6 2 7 33
% within Bursitis 21.2% 33.3% 18.2% 6.1% 21.2% 100.0%
1 Count 1 0 0 0 1 2
% within Bursitis 50.0% .0% .0% .0% 50.0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Bursitis 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.519a 4 .641
Likelihood Ratio 3.276 4 .513
Linear-by-Linear Association .064 1 .801
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Fluid in RC interval * pain score(15)

Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 8 20 4 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 25.0% 62.5% 12.5% 100.0%
1 Count 0 3 0 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.712a 2 .425
Likelihood Ratio 2.664 2 .264
Linear-by-Linear Association .126 1 .722
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.

Fluid in RC interval * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 1 6 15 10 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 3.1% 18.8% 46.9% 31.3% 100.0%
1 Count 0 0 3 0 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% .0% 100.0% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.099a 3 .377
Likelihood Ratio 4.255 3 .235
Linear-by-Linear Association .524 1 .469
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .09.

Fluid in RC interval * positioning(10)

 Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 4 5 23 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 12.5% 15.6% 71.9% 100.0%
1 Count 1 0 2 3
% within Fluid in RC interval 33.3% .0% 66.7% 100.0%
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.313a 2 .519
Likelihood Ratio 1.533 2 .465
Linear-by-Linear Association .341 1 .560
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.

Fluid in RC interval * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 6 5 16 5 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 18.8% 15.6% 50.0% 15.6% 100.0%
1 Count 1 0 2 0 3
% within Fluid in RC interval 33.3% .0% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.377a 3 .711
Likelihood Ratio 2.176 3 .537
Linear-by-Linear Association .245 1 .621
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.

Fluid in RC interval * abduction(10)

Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 4 7 3 13 5 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 12.5% 21.9% 9.4% 40.6% 15.6% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 0 1 1 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% 33.3% .0% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0%
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.352a 4 .852
Likelihood Ratio 1.836 4 .766
Linear-by-Linear Association .274 1 .601
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .26.

Fluid in RC interval * external rotation(10)

 Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 2 7 16 7 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 6.3% 21.9% 50.0% 21.9% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 2 0 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% 33.3% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.149a 3 .765
Likelihood Ratio 1.889 3 .596
Linear-by-Linear Association .182 1 .670
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Fluid in RC interval * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 6 4 16 6 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 18.8% 12.5% 50.0% 18.8% 100.0%
1 Count 0 1 2 0 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% 33.3% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.106a 3 .551
Likelihood Ratio 2.914 3 .405
Linear-by-Linear Association .001 1 .971
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.

Fluid in RC interval * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Fluid in RC interval 0 Count 8 9 6 2 7 32
% within Fluid in RC interval 25.0% 28.1% 18.8% 6.3% 21.9% 100.0%
1 Count 0 2 0 0 1 3
% within Fluid in RC interval .0% 66.7% .0% .0% 33.3% 100.0%
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Fluid in RC interval 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.954a 4 .566
Likelihood Ratio 4.016 4 .404
Linear-by-Linear Association .099 1 .753
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * pain score(15)

 Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 6 23 4 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 18.2% 69.7% 12.1% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 2 0 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 100.0% .0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.159a 2 .028
Likelihood Ratio 6.335 2 .042
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.902 1 .027
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .23.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 0 5 18 10 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis .0% 15.2% 54.5% 30.3% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 1 1 0 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 50.0% 50.0% .0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 19.533a 3 .000
Likelihood Ratio 9.926 3 .019
Linear-by-Linear Association 5.201 1 .023
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .06.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 4 4 25 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 12.1% 12.1% 75.8% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 1 1 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 50.0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.303a 2 .071
Likelihood Ratio 5.324 2 .070
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.458 1 .035
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 6 4 18 5 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 18.2% 12.1% 54.5% 15.2% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 1 1 0 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 50.0% 50.0% .0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.242a 3 .236
Likelihood Ratio 4.587 3 .205
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.693 1 .101
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * abduction(10)

 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 2 8 3 14 6 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 6.1% 24.2% 9.1% 42.4% 18.2% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 2 0 0 0 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 100.0% .0% .0% .0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 16.439a 4 .002
Likelihood Ratio 9.787 4 .044
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.371 1 .012
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 1 7 18 7 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 3.0% 21.2% 54.5% 21.2% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 1 1 0 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 50.0% 50.0% .0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.479a 3 .024
Likelihood Ratio 6.531 3 .088
Linear-by-Linear Association 5.961 1 .015
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 5 5 17 6 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 15.2% 15.2% 51.5% 18.2% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 1 0 1 0 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis 50.0% .0% 50.0% .0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.003a 3 .572
Likelihood Ratio 2.201 3 .532
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.075 1 .300
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .29.
Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen shoulder) * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Adhesive capsulitis (Frozen 0 Count 8 11 6 2 6 33
shoulder)
% within Adhesive capsulitis 24.2% 33.3% 18.2% 6.1% 18.2% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
1 Count 0 0 0 0 2 2
% within Adhesive capsulitis .0% .0% .0% .0% 100.0% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Adhesive capsulitis 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
(Frozen shoulder)

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.159a 4 .128
Likelihood Ratio 6.335 4 .175
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.920 1 .027
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .11.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * pain score(15)

 Crosstab

pain score(15)

5 10 15 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 6 22 4 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 18.8% 68.8% 12.5% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 2 1 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint 66.7% 33.3% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 8 23 4 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 22.9% 65.7% 11.4% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.654a 2 .161
Likelihood Ratio 3.251 2 .197
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.949 1 .086
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 4 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .34.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * activity lavel(10)

Crosstab

activity lavel(10)

2 5 6 10 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 1 4 17 10 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 3.1% 12.5% 53.1% 31.3% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 0 2 1 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint .0% 66.7% 33.3% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 1 6 18 10 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 2.9% 17.1% 51.4% 28.6% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.935a 3 .115
Likelihood Ratio 5.113 3 .164
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.658 1 .198
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .09.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * positioning(10)

Crosstab

positioning(10)

6 8 10 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 4 4 24 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 12.5% 12.5% 75.0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 1 1 1 3
% within Glenohumeral joint 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 5 5 25 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 14.3% 14.3% 71.4% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.333a 2 .311
Likelihood Ratio 2.070 2 .355
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.962 1 .161
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * forward flexion(10)

Crosstab

forward flexion(10)

4 6 8 10 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 7 3 17 5 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 21.9% 9.4% 53.1% 15.6% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 0 2 1 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint .0% 66.7% 33.3% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 7 5 18 5 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 20.0% 14.3% 51.4% 14.3% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.636a 3 .054
Likelihood Ratio 6.021 3 .111
Linear-by-Linear Association .245 1 .621
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * abduction(10)

 Crosstab

abduction(10)

2 4 6 8 10 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 3 7 3 13 6 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 9.4% 21.9% 9.4% 40.6% 18.8% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 1 1 0 1 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint 33.3% 33.3% .0% 33.3% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 4 8 3 14 6 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 11.4% 22.9% 8.6% 40.0% 17.1% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.415a 4 .660
Likelihood Ratio 2.744 4 .602
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.711 1 .191
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 7 cells (70.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .26.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * external rotation(10)

Crosstab

external rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 1 7 17 7 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 3.1% 21.9% 53.1% 21.9% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 1 1 1 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 2 8 18 7 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 5.7% 22.9% 51.4% 20.0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
 Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.403a 3 .145
Likelihood Ratio 3.951 3 .267
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.678 1 .055
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * internal rotation(10)

Crosstab

internal rotation(10)

2 4 6 8 Total
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 5 5 16 6 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 15.6% 15.6% 50.0% 18.8% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 1 0 2 0 3
% within Glenohumeral joint 33.3% .0% 66.7% .0% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 6 5 18 6 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 17.1% 14.3% 51.4% 17.1% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.681a 3 .641
Likelihood Ratio 2.511 3 .473
Linear-by-Linear Association .439 1 .508
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 5 cells (62.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .43.
Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis * Strength_Abd_grp

Crosstab

Strength_Abd_grp

>20 16-20 11-15 6-10 <6 Total

Glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis 0 Count 8 10 6 2 6 32
% within Glenohumeral joint 25.0% 31.3% 18.8% 6.3% 18.8% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
1 Count 0 1 0 0 2 3
% within Glenohumeral joint .0% 33.3% .0% .0% 66.7% 100.0%
osteoarthritis
Total Count 8 11 6 2 8 35
% within Glenohumeral joint 22.9% 31.4% 17.1% 5.7% 22.9% 100.0%
osteoarthritis

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.259a 4 .372
Likelihood Ratio 4.776 4 .311
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.361 1 .124
N of Valid Cases 35

a. 6 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count
is .17.
T-Test

Group Statistics
Gr-1
supraspi
natus
tear N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 25 9.60 3.202 .640
1 10 9.00 2.108 .667
activity lavel(10) 0 25 6.88 2.333 .467
1 10 6.80 1.687 .533
positioning(10) 0 25 9.12 1.424 .285
1 10 9.20 1.687 .533
forward flexion(10) 0 25 7.36 1.890 .378
1 10 6.80 2.150 .680
abduction(10) 0 25 6.32 2.750 .550
1 10 7.20 2.348 .742
external rotation(10) 0 25 5.68 1.796 .359
1 10 5.80 1.135 .359
internal rotation(10) 0 25 5.28 1.904 .381
1 10 5.60 2.066 .653
strength of abduction(25) 0 25 14.00 9.566 1.913
1 10 16.20 6.812 2.154
constant score(100) 0 25 63.40 22.301 4.460
1 10 66.30 17.988 5.688

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Sig. (2-tailed) Std. Error
F Sig. t df P values Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .629 .433 .545 33 .590 .600 1.102 -1.641 2.841
Equal variances not assumed .649 25.217 .522 .600 .924 -1.303 2.503
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 3.015 .092 .098 33 .922 .080 .814 -1.576 1.736
Equal variances not assumed .113 22.998 .911 .080 .709 -1.386 1.546
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed .074 .787 -.143 33 .888 -.080 .561 -1.222 1.062
 Equal variances not assumed -.132 14.422 .897 -.080 .605 -1.373 1.213
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed .702 .408 .762 33 .452 .560 .735 -.935 2.055
Equal variances not assumed .720 14.893 .483 .560 .778 -1.099 2.219
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed 2.210 .147 -.889 33 .381 -.880 .990 -2.894 1.134
Equal variances not assumed -.953 19.397 .353 -.880 .924 -2.811 1.051
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 3.054 .090 -.195 33 .846 -.120 .615 -1.370 1.130
Equal variances not assumed -.236 26.198 .815 -.120 .508 -1.164 .924
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .080 .779 -.439 33 .664 -.320 .729 -1.804 1.164
Equal variances not assumed -.423 15.489 .678 -.320 .756 -1.927 1.287
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed 3.434 .073 -.661 33 .513 -2.200 3.330 -8.975 4.575
Equal variances not assumed -.764 23.350 .453 -2.200 2.881 -8.155 3.755
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed 1.341 .255 -.365 33 .717 -2.900 7.937 -19.047 13.247
Equal variances not assumed -.401 20.555 .692 -2.900 7.228 -17.952 12.152

T-Test

Group Statistics
Gr-II
supraspi
natus
tear N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 30 9.67 2.916 .532
1 5 8.00 2.739 1.225
activity lavel(10) 0 30 7.03 2.266 .414
1 5 5.80 .447 .200
positioning(10) 0 30 9.27 1.437 .262
1 5 8.40 1.673 .748
forward flexion(10) 0 30 7.33 1.918 .350
1 5 6.40 2.191 .980
abduction(10) 0 30 6.93 2.559 .467
1 5 4.40 2.191 .980
external rotation(10) 0 30 5.87 1.655 .302
1 5 4.80 1.095 .490
internal rotation(10) 0 30 5.53 1.943 .355
1 5 4.40 1.673 .748
strength of abduction(25) 0 30 15.40 8.557 1.562
1 5 10.00 10.000 4.472
constant score(100) 0 30 66.57 20.989 3.832
1 5 50.20 15.691 7.017

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .281 .600 1.192 33 .242 1.667 1.399 -1.179 4.512
Equal variances not assumed 1.248 5.627 .261 1.667 1.335 -1.654 4.988
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 12.182 .001 1.199 33 .239 1.233 1.029 -.860 3.327
Equal variances not assumed 2.684 31.621 .011 1.233 .460 .297 2.170
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed .137 .713 1.223 33 .230 .867 .709 -.576 2.309
Equal variances not assumed 1.093 5.033 .324 .867 .793 -1.168 2.901
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed .539 .468 .989 33 .330 .933 .943 -.986 2.853
Equal variances not assumed .897 5.076 .410 .933 1.040 -1.729 3.596
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed 1.194 .282 2.084 33 .045 2.533 1.216 .060 5.007
Equal variances not assumed 2.334 5.983 .058 2.533 1.085 -.125 5.191
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .109 .743 1.382 33 .176 1.067 .772 -.504 2.637
Equal variances not assumed 1.853 7.475 .104 1.067 .576 -.277 2.410
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .127 .723 1.227 33 .229 1.133 .924 -.746 3.013
Equal variances not assumed 1.369 5.958 .221 1.133 .828 -.897 3.163
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed .285 .597 1.278 33 .210 5.400 4.224 -3.193 13.993
Equal variances not assumed 1.140 5.025 .306 5.400 4.737 -6.759 17.559
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .332 .568 1.659 33 .107 16.367 9.864 -3.701 36.435
Equal variances not assumed 2.047 6.660 .082 16.367 7.995 -2.737 35.470

T-Test

Group Statistics
Supraspi
natus
tendinop
athy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 23 9.57 2.982 .622
1 12 9.17 2.887 .833
activity lavel(10) 0 23 6.91 1.905 .397
1 12 6.75 2.633 .760
positioning(10) 0 23 9.04 1.581 .330
1 12 9.33 1.303 .376
forward flexion(10) 0 23 7.04 2.163 .451
1 12 7.50 1.508 .435
abduction(10) 0 23 6.61 2.658 .554
1 12 6.50 2.714 .783
external rotation(10) 0 23 5.74 1.630 .340
1 12 5.67 1.670 .482
internal rotation(10) 0 23 5.30 2.141 .446
1 12 5.50 1.508 .435
strength of abduction(25) 0 23 14.65 8.866 1.849
1 12 14.58 9.140 2.638
constant score(100) 0 23 64.30 21.261 4.433
1 12 64.08 21.241 6.132

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .017 .896 .379 33 .707 .399 1.051 -1.739 2.536
Equal variances not assumed .383 23.082 .705 .399 1.040 -1.752 2.549
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 2.008 .166 .211 33 .835 .163 .774 -1.413 1.739
Equal variances not assumed .190 17.188 .851 .163 .858 -1.645 1.971
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed 1.363 .251 -.545 33 .589 -.290 .532 -1.372 .792
Equal variances not assumed -.580 26.554 .567 -.290 .500 -1.317 .737
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed 4.579 .040 -.651 33 .520 -.457 .701 -1.883 .970
Equal variances not assumed -.728 30.012 .472 -.457 .627 -1.737 .824
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .264 .611 .114 33 .910 .109 .953 -1.831 2.048
Equal variances not assumed .113 22.014 .911 .109 .960 -1.881 2.099
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .030 .864 .124 33 .902 .072 .585 -1.118 1.263
Equal variances not assumed .123 21.943 .903 .072 .590 -1.151 1.296
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 3.197 .083 -.281 33 .780 -.196 .695 -1.611 1.219
Equal variances not assumed -.314 29.823 .756 -.196 .623 -1.469 1.078
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed .004 .950 .022 33 .983 .069 3.190 -6.421 6.559
Equal variances not assumed .021 21.821 .983 .069 3.222 -6.616 6.753
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .001 .976 .029 33 .977 .221 7.569 -15.178 15.620
Equal variances not assumed .029 22.440 .977 .221 7.566 -15.453 15.895

T-Test

Group Statistics
Supraspi
natus
tendinitis N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 34 9.41 2.955 .507
1 1 10.00 . .
activity lavel(10) 0 34 6.88 2.171 .372
1 1 6.00 . .
positioning(10) 0 34 9.12 1.493 .256
1 1 10.00 . .
forward flexion(10) 0 34 7.18 1.977 .339
1 1 8.00 . .
abduction(10) 0 34 6.53 2.666 .457
1 1 8.00 . .
external rotation(10) 0 34 5.71 1.643 .282
1 1 6.00 . .
internal rotation(10) 0 34 5.29 1.899 .326
1 1 8.00 . .
strength of abduction(25) 0 34 14.47 8.908 1.528
1 1 20.00 . .
constant score(100) 0 34 63.88 21.153 3.628
1 1 76.00 . .

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
 Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed . . -.196 33 .846 -.588 2.999 -6.689 5.512
Equal variances not assumed . . . -.588 . . .
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed . . .401 33 .691 .882 2.203 -3.599 5.364
Equal variances not assumed . . . .882 . . .
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed . . -.583 33 .564 -.882 1.514 -3.964 2.199
Equal variances not assumed . . . -.882 . . .
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed . . -.411 33 .684 -.824 2.006 -4.904 3.257
Equal variances not assumed . . . -.824 . . .
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed . . -.544 33 .590 -1.471 2.704 -6.973 4.032
Equal variances not assumed . . . -1.471 . . .
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed . . -.176 33 .861 -.294 1.667 -3.685 3.097
Equal variances not assumed . . . -.294 . . .
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed . . -1.404 33 .170 -2.706 1.927 -6.627 1.215
Equal variances not assumed . . . -2.706 . . .
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed . . -.612 33 .545 -5.529 9.038 -23.917 12.858
Equal variances not assumed . . . -5.529 . . .
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed . . -.565 33 .576 -12.118 21.462 -55.782 31.546
Equal variances not assumed . . . -12.118 . . .

T-Test

Warnings
The Independent Samples table is not produced.

Group Statistics
Infraspin
atus
&amp;
teres
minor
tendinop
athy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 35 9.43 2.913 .492
1 0a
. . .
activity lavel(10) 0 35 6.86 2.144 .362
1 0a . . .
positioning(10) 0 35 9.14 1.478 .250
1 0a
. . .
forward flexion(10) 0 35 7.20 1.952 .330
1 0a . . .
abduction(10) 0 35 6.57 2.638 .446
1 0a . . .
external rotation(10) 0 35 5.71 1.619 .274
1 0a . . .
internal rotation(10) 0 35 5.37 1.926 .326
1 0a . . .
strength of abduction(25) 0 35 14.63 8.825 1.492
1 0a . . .
constant score(100) 0 35 64.23 20.940 3.539
1 0a
. . .
a. t cannot be computed because at least one of the groups is empty.

T-Test

Group Statistics
Subscap
ular
tendinop
athy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 29 9.66 2.967 .551
1 6 8.33 2.582 1.054
activity lavel(10) 0 29 7.00 2.188 .406
1 6 6.17 1.941 .792
positioning(10) 0 29 9.10 1.566 .291
1 6 9.33 1.033 .422
forward flexion(10) 0 29 7.17 2.106 .391
1 6 7.33 1.033 .422
abduction(10) 0 29 6.69 2.687 .499
1 6 6.00 2.530 1.033
external rotation(10) 0 29 5.79 1.719 .319
1 6 5.33 1.033 .422
internal rotation(10) 0 29 5.31 2.089 .388
1 6 5.67 .816 .333
strength of abduction(25) 0 29 15.24 8.765 1.628
1 6 11.67 9.309 3.801
constant score(100) 0 29 65.48 21.591 4.009
1 6 58.17 17.826 7.277

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .101 .753 1.012 33 .319 1.322 1.306 -1.336 3.979
Equal variances not assumed 1.111 7.999 .299 1.322 1.189 -1.421 4.065
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 1.318 .259 .863 33 .394 .833 .965 -1.130 2.797
Equal variances not assumed .936 7.877 .377 .833 .890 -1.226 2.892
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed 1.350 .254 -.342 33 .734 -.230 .672 -1.597 1.137
Equal variances not assumed -.449 10.467 .663 -.230 .512 -1.364 .905
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed 3.842 .058 -.181 33 .857 -.161 .888 -1.968 1.646
Equal variances not assumed -.280 15.279 .783 -.161 .575 -1.385 1.063
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .451 .507 .577 33 .568 .690 1.195 -1.741 3.121
Equal variances not assumed .601 7.534 .565 .690 1.147 -1.984 3.363
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .629 .433 .627 33 .535 .460 .733 -1.031 1.951
Equal variances not assumed .869 11.690 .402 .460 .529 -.696 1.615
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 6.168 .018 -.407 33 .686 -.356 .875 -2.136 1.423
Equal variances not assumed -.697 20.878 .494 -.356 .511 -1.420 .708
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed .100 .754 .901 33 .374 3.575 3.969 -4.501 11.650
Equal variances not assumed .865 6.961 .416 3.575 4.134 -6.213 13.362
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .368 .548 .774 33 .444 7.316 9.447 -11.904 26.537
Equal variances not assumed .881 8.358 .403 7.316 8.309 -11.702 26.334

T-Test

Group Statistics
 Biceps
tendinitis N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 31 9.35 3.094 .556
1 4 10.00 .000 .000
activity lavel(10) 0 31 6.58 2.029 .364
1 4 9.00 2.000 1.000
positioning(10) 0 31 9.03 1.538 .276
1 4 10.00 .000 .000
forward flexion(10) 0 31 7.03 1.991 .358
1 4 8.50 1.000 .500
abduction(10) 0 31 6.39 2.704 .486
1 4 8.00 1.633 .816
external rotation(10) 0 31 5.61 1.667 .299
1 4 6.50 1.000 .500
internal rotation(10) 0 31 5.29 1.970 .354
1 4 6.00 1.633 .816
strength of abduction(25) 0 31 13.90 9.071 1.629
1 4 20.25 3.500 1.750
constant score(100) 0 31 62.19 21.083 3.787
1 4 80.00 12.247 6.124

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed 4.527 .041 -.412 33 .683 -.645 1.567 -3.833 2.543
Equal variances not assumed -1.161 30.000 .255 -.645 .556 -1.780 .490
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed .004 .948 -2.247 33 .031 -2.419 1.077 -4.610 -.229
Equal variances not assumed -2.273 3.843 .088 -2.419 1.064 -5.423 .584
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed 11.370 .002 -1.242 33 .223 -.968 .779 -2.553 .617
Equal variances not assumed -3.503 30.000 .001 -.968 .276 -1.532 -.404
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed 3.550 .068 -1.437 33 .160 -1.468 1.021 -3.546 .610
Equal variances not assumed -2.388 6.681 .050 -1.468 .615 -2.936 .000
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed 5.478 .025 -1.157 33 .256 -1.613 1.394 -4.450 1.224
Equal variances not assumed -1.698 5.430 .146 -1.613 .950 -3.998 .772
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 1.106 .301 -1.032 33 .309 -.887 .859 -2.636 .861
 Equal variances not assumed -1.522 5.466 .184 -.887 .583 -2.348 .573
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 1.066 .309 -.688 33 .496 -.710 1.031 -2.808 1.389
Equal variances not assumed -.798 4.217 .468 -.710 .890 -3.131 1.712
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed 4.598 .039 -1.371 33 .180 -6.347 4.629 -15.765 3.071
Equal variances not assumed -2.654 9.724 .025 -6.347 2.391 -11.695 -.999
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed 2.651 .113 -1.640 33 .111 -17.806 10.858 -39.898 4.285
Equal variances not assumed -2.473 5.650 .051 -17.806 7.200 -35.692 .079

T-Test

Group Statistics
bicepital
tendinop
athy N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 24 9.58 3.269 .667
1 11 9.09 2.023 .610
activity lavel(10) 0 24 6.96 2.349 .480
1 11 6.64 1.690 .509
positioning(10) 0 24 9.33 1.274 .260
1 11 8.73 1.849 .557
forward flexion(10) 0 24 7.33 2.099 .428
1 11 6.91 1.640 .495
abduction(10) 0 24 6.67 2.548 .520
1 11 6.36 2.942 .887
external rotation(10) 0 24 5.83 1.761 .359
1 11 5.45 1.293 .390
internal rotation(10) 0 24 5.42 1.998 .408
1 11 5.27 1.849 .557
strength of abduction(25) 0 24 14.88 8.634 1.762
1 11 14.09 9.638 2.906
constant score(100) 0 24 65.42 21.825 4.455
1 11 61.64 19.608 5.912

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
 95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed 1.180 .285 .459 33 .649 .492 1.073 -1.691 2.676
Equal variances not assumed .545 29.745 .590 .492 .904 -1.354 2.339
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 3.993 .054 .407 33 .686 .322 .790 -1.286 1.930
Equal variances not assumed .460 26.523 .649 .322 .700 -1.115 1.759
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed 5.127 .030 1.131 33 .266 .606 .536 -.484 1.697
Equal variances not assumed .985 14.527 .341 .606 .615 -.709 1.921
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed .774 .385 .591 33 .559 .424 .718 -1.036 1.885
Equal variances not assumed .648 24.613 .523 .424 .654 -.925 1.773
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .437 .513 .311 33 .758 .303 .973 -1.677 2.284
Equal variances not assumed .295 17.176 .772 .303 1.028 -1.865 2.471
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .240 .627 .637 33 .529 .379 .595 -.831 1.589
Equal variances not assumed .714 26.041 .481 .379 .530 -.711 1.469
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .216 .645 .202 33 .841 .144 .712 -1.304 1.592
Equal variances not assumed .208 20.962 .837 .144 .691 -1.293 1.581
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed 1.018 .320 .241 33 .811 .784 3.259 -5.846 7.414
Equal variances not assumed .231 17.670 .820 .784 3.399 -6.366 7.934
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .026 .873 .490 33 .627 3.780 7.711 -11.908 19.468
Equal variances not assumed .511 21.560 .615 3.780 7.403 -11.590 19.150

T-Test

Group Statistics

Bursitis N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

pain score(15) 0 33 9.55 2.895 .504
1 2 7.50 3.536 2.500
activity lavel(10) 0 33 6.82 2.113 .368
1 2 7.50 3.536 2.500
positioning(10) 0 33 9.15 1.503 .262
1 2 9.00 1.414 1.000
forward flexion(10) 0 33 7.15 2.002 .348
1 2 8.00 .000 .000
abduction(10) 0 33 6.67 2.582 .449
 1 2 5.00 4.243 3.000
external rotation(10) 0 33 5.76 1.640 .285
1 2 5.00 1.414 1.000
internal rotation(10) 0 33 5.39 1.968 .343
1 2 5.00 1.414 1.000
strength of abduction(25) 0 33 14.85 8.621 1.501
1 2 11.00 15.556 11.000
constant score(100) 0 33 64.61 20.810 3.623
1 2 58.00 31.113 22.000

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .140 .711 .963 33 .342 2.045 2.124 -2.275 6.366
Equal variances not assumed .802 1.083 .561 2.045 2.550 -25.049 29.140
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed .836 .367 -.431 33 .669 -.682 1.580 -3.897 2.533
Equal variances not assumed -.270 1.044 .831 -.682 2.527 -29.777 28.413
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed .155 .696 .139 33 .891 .152 1.092 -2.071 2.374
Equal variances not assumed .147 1.141 .905 .152 1.034 -9.699 10.002
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed 5.136 .030 -.591 33 .559 -.848 1.436 -3.769 2.072
Equal variances not assumed -2.435 32.000 .021 -.848 .348 -1.558 -.139
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .762 .389 .864 33 .394 1.667 1.928 -2.256 5.589
Equal variances not assumed .549 1.045 .677 1.667 3.033 -33.140 36.473
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .065 .800 .637 33 .529 .758 1.190 -1.663 3.178
Equal variances not assumed .728 1.169 .584 .758 1.040 -8.691 10.206
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .481 .493 .277 33 .784 .394 1.422 -2.500 3.288
Equal variances not assumed .373 1.248 .763 .394 1.057 -8.118 8.906
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed 1.295 .263 .593 33 .557 3.848 6.489 -9.353 17.050
Equal variances not assumed .347 1.038 .786 3.848 11.102 -125.701 133.398
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .380 .542 .428 33 .671 6.606 15.435 -24.797 38.009
Equal variances not assumed .296 1.055 .815 6.606 22.296 -244.102 257.314
T-Test

Group Statistics
Fluid in
RC
interval N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 32 9.38 3.045 .538
1 3 10.00 .000 .000
activity lavel(10) 0 32 6.94 2.228 .394
1 3 6.00 .000 .000
positioning(10) 0 32 9.19 1.424 .252
1 3 8.67 2.309 1.333
forward flexion(10) 0 32 7.25 1.951 .345
1 3 6.67 2.309 1.333
abduction(10) 0 32 6.50 2.640 .467
1 3 7.33 3.055 1.764
external rotation(10) 0 32 5.75 1.666 .294
1 3 5.33 1.155 .667
internal rotation(10) 0 32 5.38 1.996 .353
1 3 5.33 1.155 .667
strength of abduction(25) 0 32 14.75 8.755 1.548
1 3 13.33 11.547 6.667
constant score(100) 0 32 64.38 21.240 3.755
1 3 62.67 21.385 12.347

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed 3.223 .082 -.351 33 .728 -.625 1.782 -4.251 3.001
Equal variances not assumed -1.161 31.000 .255 -.625 .538 -1.723 .473
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 9.051 .005 .719 33 .477 .938 1.304 -1.715 3.590
Equal variances not assumed 2.380 31.000 .024 .938 .394 .134 1.741
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed 1.649 .208 .578 33 .567 .521 .901 -1.313 2.355
Equal variances not assumed .384 2.145 .736 .521 1.357 -4.955 5.997
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed .071 .792 .489 33 .628 .583 1.192 -1.842 3.009
Equal variances not assumed .424 2.276 .709 .583 1.377 -4.704 5.871
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .015 .903 -.518 33 .608 -.833 1.610 -4.109 2.443
Equal variances not assumed -.457 2.289 .688 -.833 1.825 -7.806 6.140
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .288 .595 .421 33 .676 .417 .990 -1.597 2.430
Equal variances not assumed .572 2.849 .609 .417 .729 -1.974 2.807
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed 1.148 .292 .035 33 .972 .042 1.181 -2.360 2.444
Equal variances not assumed .055 3.261 .959 .042 .754 -2.254 2.337
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed .376 .544 .262 33 .795 1.417 5.403 -9.577 12.410
Equal variances not assumed .207 2.221 .853 1.417 6.844 -25.394 28.227
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .007 .935 .133 33 .895 1.708 12.830 -24.395 27.812
Equal variances not assumed .132 2.386 .905 1.708 12.905 -46.043 49.460

T-Test

Group Statistics
Adhesive
capsulitis
(Frozen
shoulder) N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 33 9.70 2.778 .484
1 2 5.00 .000 .000
activity lavel(10) 0 33 7.06 1.999 .348
1 2 3.50 2.121 1.500
positioning(10) 0 33 9.27 1.398 .243
1 2 7.00 1.414 1.000
forward flexion(10) 0 33 7.33 1.915 .333
1 2 5.00 1.414 1.000
abduction(10) 0 33 6.85 2.451 .427
1 2 2.00 .000 .000
external rotation(10) 0 33 5.88 1.495 .260
1 2 3.00 1.414 1.000
internal rotation(10) 0 33 5.45 1.889 .329
1 2 4.00 2.828 2.000
strength of abduction(25) 0 33 15.52 8.281 1.441
1 2 .00 .000 .000
constant score(100) 0 33 66.36 19.508 3.396
 1 2 29.00 9.899 7.000

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed 1.205 .280 2.358 33 .024 4.697 1.992 .644 8.750
Equal variances not assumed 9.712 32.000 .000 4.697 .484 3.712 5.682
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed .213 .648 2.441 33 .020 3.561 1.459 .593 6.528
Equal variances not assumed 2.312 1.110 .240 3.561 1.540 -11.956 19.077
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed .029 .866 2.232 33 .033 2.273 1.018 .201 4.345
Equal variances not assumed 2.208 1.122 .249 2.273 1.029 -7.883 12.428
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed .451 .507 1.685 33 .101 2.333 1.385 -.484 5.151
Equal variances not assumed 2.214 1.234 .231 2.333 1.054 -6.325 10.992
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed 6.448 .016 2.759 33 .009 4.848 1.758 1.273 8.424
Equal variances not assumed 11.364 32.000 .000 4.848 .427 3.979 5.718
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .002 .967 2.649 33 .012 2.879 1.087 .667 5.090
Equal variances not assumed 2.786 1.140 .194 2.879 1.033 -6.994 12.751
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .397 .533 1.038 33 .307 1.455 1.401 -1.396 4.305
Equal variances not assumed .718 1.055 .599 1.455 2.027 -21.344 24.253
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed 3.280 .079 2.613 33 .013 15.515 5.938 3.434 27.596
Equal variances not assumed 10.763 32.000 .000 15.515 1.441 12.579 18.451
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed 1.112 .299 2.660 33 .012 37.364 14.045 8.789 65.939
Equal variances not assumed 4.802 1.523 .067 37.364 7.780 -8.452 83.179

T-Test

Group Statistics
Glenohu
meral
joint
osteoarth
ritis N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
pain score(15) 0 32 9.69 2.822 .499
1 3 6.67 2.887 1.667
activity lavel(10) 0 32 7.00 2.185 .386
1 3 5.33 .577 .333
positioning(10) 0 32 9.25 1.414 .250
1 3 8.00 2.000 1.155
forward flexion(10) 0 32 7.25 2.016 .356
1 3 6.67 1.155 .667
abduction(10) 0 32 6.75 2.578 .456
1 3 4.67 3.055 1.764
external rotation(10) 0 32 5.88 1.519 .268
1 3 4.00 2.000 1.155
internal rotation(10) 0 32 5.44 1.917 .339
1 3 4.67 2.309 1.333
strength of abduction(25) 0 32 15.38 8.373 1.480
1 3 6.67 11.547 6.667
constant score(100) 0 32 65.88 20.286 3.586
1 3 46.67 23.861 13.776

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Std. Error
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Difference Lower Upper
pain score(15) Equal variances assumed .130 .720 1.770 33 .086 3.021 1.706 -.451 6.492
Equal variances not assumed 1.736 2.373 .205 3.021 1.740 -3.442 9.484
activity lavel(10) Equal variances assumed 5.207 .029 1.300 33 .202 1.667 1.282 -.941 4.274
Equal variances not assumed 3.267 9.833 .009 1.667 .510 .527 2.806
positioning(10) Equal variances assumed .163 .689 1.421 33 .165 1.250 .879 -.539 3.039
Equal variances not assumed 1.058 2.192 .393 1.250 1.181 -3.430 5.930
forward flexion(10) Equal variances assumed 1.384 .248 .489 33 .628 .583 1.192 -1.842 3.009
Equal variances not assumed .772 3.289 .492 .583 .756 -1.707 2.874
abduction(10) Equal variances assumed .000 .987 1.322 33 .195 2.083 1.575 -1.122 5.289
Equal variances not assumed 1.144 2.275 .359 2.083 1.822 -4.913 9.080
external rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .175 .679 2.001 33 .054 1.875 .937 -.032 3.782
Equal variances not assumed 1.582 2.222 .242 1.875 1.185 -2.768 6.518
internal rotation(10) Equal variances assumed .144 .707 .657 33 .516 .771 1.173 -1.616 3.157
Equal variances not assumed .560 2.266 .626 .771 1.376 -4.530 6.072
strength of abduction(25) Equal variances assumed .591 .448 1.677 33 .103 8.708 5.192 -1.855 19.272
Equal variances not assumed 1.275 2.202 .320 8.708 6.829 -18.240 35.657
constant score(100) Equal variances assumed .086 .771 1.550 33 .131 19.208 12.391 -6.000 44.417
Equal variances not assumed 1.349 2.280 .296 19.208 14.235 -35.376 73.793