## 3 Results
### Electromyographic Data Analysis Results
#### 3.2.2 Cycle-Averaged Muscular Activation Parameters: Median and Ranges  
Figure 7 shows the results for the cycle-averaged muscular activations. Figure 7 compares differences within each health condition group due to test condition, and Figure 7 compares the differences within each test condition due to health conditions. Similar to the results for sEMG waveform parameters, significant differences were observed for all parameters in both health conditions for all parameters depending on the test condition. As expected, values in healthy participants are consistently lower when performing the VBBT. Conversely, all values are higher in patients with the VBBT, except for the range in wrist flexion and ulnar deviation (sensor 1). Generally, no significant differences were  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{10}{c}{**Kinematic Synergy**} \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Thumb\_F(t)_} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_MCPs\_F(t)_} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_PIPs\_F(t)_} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Thumb\_A(t)_} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Fingers\_A(t)_} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Health \\ condition groups \\ \end{tabular} } & Factors & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \(t\) & TC & \(t\):TC & \(t\) & TC & \(t\):TC & \(t\) & TC & \(t\):TC & \(t\) & TC & \(t\):TC \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Healthy \\ \end{tabular} } & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Patient \\ \end{tabular} } & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & & & & & & & \(*\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} Test \\ condition groups \\ \end{tabular} } & Factors & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Factors} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \(t\) & HC & \(t\):HC & \(t\) & HC & \(t\) & HC & \(t\):HC & \(t\) & HC & \(t\) & HC \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} RBBT \\ \end{tabular} } & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & & & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} VBBT \\ \end{tabular} } & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & \(*\) & & & & \(*\) & \(*\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Factors showing significant differences (\(p\) \(<\) 0.05), indicated with an asterisk (*), in the two temporal analyses performed on the kinematic synergies. First, one LME analysis per kinematic synergy for each health condition, with time (_t_), test condition (_TC_: RBBT and VBBT), and their interaction (_t_:TC) as fixed factors. Second, one LME analysis per kinematic synergy for each test condition, with time (_t_), health condition (_HC_: healthy and patients), and their interaction (_t_:HC) as fixed factors.  
identified between health conditions, except for a lower median activation in patients for wrist flexion and ulnar deviation (sensor 1), finger extension (sensor 5), and wrist extension and radial deviation (sensor 7) when performing the RBBT, and higher median activation in patients for digit flexion (sensor 3) in VBBT.