## 3 Results

Table 4: _Cont._  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Measure**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Side**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PRE**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**POST**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ANOVA Effects**} \\ \cline{3-10}  & & \(\mathbf{M\pm SD}\) **(95\% CI)** & **Shapiro–Wilk (\(p\))**The analysis of variance for the STIFF variable for AT revealed a significant main effect for TIME POINT (\(F\) = 6.53; \(p\) = 0.015; \({\eta_{p}}^{2}\) = 0.035) (Table 6). The interaction between TIME POINT \(\times\) Side approached significance but was not statistically significant (\(F\) = 3.05; \(p\) = 0.089). The between-side analysis showed no significant effect for the Side factor (\(F\) = 0.270; \(p\) = 0.606). Post hoc comparisons confirmed a statistically significant improvement from pre- to post-intervention, with a \(\Delta\) of 38.6 (\(t\) = 2.55; \(p\) = 0.015). The analysis of variance for the STIFF variable for S revealed a significant main effect for TIME POINT (\(F\) = 5.15; \(p\) = 0.029; \({\eta_{p}}^{2}\) = 0.014). The interaction between TIME POINT \(\times\) Side was not significant (\(F\) = 0.010; \(p\) = 0.921), and the Side factor in the between-side analysis showed no significant effect (\(F\) = 1.45; \(p\) = 0.235). Post hoc comparisons confirmed a significant pre-post improvement, with a \(\Delta\) of 6.52 (\(t\) = 2.27; \(p\) = 0.029). The analysis of the STIFF variable for RF revealed a significant main effect for TIME POINT (\(F\) = 31.92; \(p\) < 0.001; \({\eta_{p}}^{2}\) = 0.207). The interaction between TIME POINT \(\times\) Side was not significant (\(F\) = 0.019; \(p\) = 0.892), and the Side factor in the between-side analysis also showed no significant effect (\(F\) = 0.01; \(p\) = 0.968). Post hoc comparisons confirmed a significant improvement, with a \(\Delta\) of 27.6 (\(t\) = 5.65; \(p\) < 0.001). Results for STIFF changes are presented in Figure 3. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Measure**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Side**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**PRE**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**POST**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**ANOVA Effects**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & \(\mathbf{M\pm SD}\) & **Shapiro–Wilk** & **M \(\pm\) SD** & **Shapiro–Wilk** & **(\(p\))** & **Time** & **Side** & **Time \(\times\) Side** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**AT**} & \multirow{2}{*}{R} & 25.60 \(\pm\) 3.67 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.97 (0.61)} & 23.50 \(\pm\) 3.57 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.97 (0.66)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.97 (0.66)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) = 0.015} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (23.90, 27.30) & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**ST**} & \multirow{2}{*}{L} & 25.40 \(\pm\) 2.61 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.95 (0.41)} & 25.00 \(\pm\) 3.41 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.91 (0.06)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.94 (0.25)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (24.30, 26.60) & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**BF**} & \multirow{2}{*}{R} & 16.30 \(\pm\) 1.33 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.96 (0.55)} & 16.50 \(\pm\) 1.20 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.94 (0.25)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (15.70, 16.90) & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{} & \multirow{2}{*}{L} & 16.10 \(\pm\) 1.53 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.90 (0.03)} & 15.90 \(\pm\) 1.25 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.96 (0.58)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.96 (0.58)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (15.40, 16.80) & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**S**} & \multirow{2}{*}{R} & 17.00 \(\pm\) 1.24 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.95 (0.33)} & 16.60 \(\pm\) 1.38 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.95 (0.31)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.95 (0.31)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) = 0.029} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (16.40, 17.50) & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{} & \multirow{2}{*}{L} & 17.10 \(\pm\) 1.51 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.95 (0.30)} & 17.00 \(\pm\) 1.26 & \multirow{2}{*}{0.86 (0.01)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) = 0.029} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\) > 0.05} \\  & & (16.50, 17.80) & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}