# Prediction of Changes in Blood Parameters Induced by Low-Frequency Ultrasound
## 3 Results
### Statistical Analysis  
We used a Kruskal-Wallis test with [PERSON]'s post hoc test to determine whether there was a significant difference in the effect of ultrasound (in terms of different intensities and durations) on different blood parameters. In the table below, each row represents the null hypothesis that the distribution of the two samples is the same. When there is no evidence to reject the null hypothesis, then there is no significant difference, meaning that ultrasound has no effect (or a very small effect) on a particular blood parameter. Otherwise, if the null hypothesis is rejected, this indicates that there is a significant difference between the values of the blood parameters affected by the ultrasound signals. Table 3 shows that for 11 out of 20 parameters, the impact of the ultrasound signals (six different ultrasound conditions) is statistically significant (\(p\)-value is <0.05). The diagrams presented in Figure 3 show the results of the Kruskal-Wallis test for different blood parameters with a \(p\)-value of >0.05 (null hypothesis is retained), starting from the baseline value and affected by ultrasound. The notations of the ultrasound set for the sonication of the blood samples are presented on the horizontal axis, varying in strength (C--control/no US, high--H, medium--M, low--W) and duration (90 s and 180 s). The changes in RDW values after exposure of the blood to ultrasound are very minor, with a slightly larger increase observed when exposed to the highest ultrasound signal for 180 s (180 H). By exposing the blood to a high ultrasound signal for 180 s, we can see that the set of recorded RDW values are outside the normal range. However, the median line between all sets, except 180 H, is almost straight. As we can see, the MCV values are almost non-sensitive to the ultrasound signal, and all values in this blood set are within the normal range (75-100). A similar situation can be observed with parameters such as HGB and LYM, where only 180 H has an ultrasound signal. Again, a similar situation applies to parameters such as HGB and PDW, where only the highest ultrasound signal at 90 s (90 H) and 180 s (180 H) durations influences the values of the parameters. A review of all the blood parameters for which the null hypothesis is retained reveals that the parameter values at 90 H and 180 H slightly increase or decrease. The boxplot diagrams in Figure 4 show the results of Kruskal-Wallis tests for different blood parameters for which the \(p\)-value is very low <0.001 (null hypothesis is rejected) and the effect of ultrasound on these parameters is therefore most significant. In a set of 20 blood parameters, 5 of them responded quite severely to high-intensity ultrasound signals. Analyzing the RBC values, we can observe that a strong ultrasound signal causes a sharp decrease in values, a medium intensity signal has almost no effect, and a weak one leads to a slight increase in values. A similar situation can be observed with the HTC parameter. From the results of MCH and MCHC parameters, we can see that, in contrast to RBC and HTC, a strong ultrasound signal leads to an increase in parameter values outside the normal range, including extreme values. In the case of the MID (%) parameter, there is also an increase in values when exposed to a strong ultrasound signal for both 90 and 180 s. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l l l l} \hline \hline  & & & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Blood Parameters with \(p\)-Value \textless{} 0.05**} \\ \hline RBC & HTC & MPV & PDW & LPCR & WBC & MCH & MCHC & GRA(\%) & GRAN & MID(\%) \\ \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & 0.037 & 0.044 & 0.015 & 0.010 & \textless{}0.001 & \textless{}0.001 & 0.006 & 0.002 & \textless{}0.001 \\ \multicolumn{10}{l}{**Blood Parameters with \(p\)-Value \textgreater{} 0.05**} \\ RDW & MCV & PLT & PCT & HGB & LYM & MID & RDWa & LYM(\%) & & \\
0.990 & 0.842 & 0.885 & 0.808 & 0.584 & 0.166 & 0.467 & 0.977 & 0.157 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Kruskal–Wallis null hypothesis test results.