## 3 Results
### Functional Reach Performance Test
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Between Conditions**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Post Hoc Comparisons**} \\ \cline{4-7}
**Variable** & **Condition** & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean (SD)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**F Value (df);**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean Difference (\(p\)-Value)**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & & & \(p\)**-Value (Observed Power)** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Mean Difference (\(p\)-Value)**} \\ \cline{3-7}  & & **Reach** & **Return** & **Reach** & **Return** & **Reach** & **Return** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ECM Muscle (\%)} & Control & 3.58 (2.32) & 2.72 (1.84) & & & \\  & 220 mL & 3.80 (2.45) & 3.01 (2.02) & 0.438 (2.364); & 1.845 (3); & \\  & 315 mL & 3.72 (2.50) & 3.09 (2.32) & 0.680 (0.125) & 0.144 (0.466) & \\  & 365 mL & 3.67 (2.26) & 2.90 (1.89) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{ESC Muscle (\%)} & Control & 49.47 (31.20) & 22.45 (11.35) & & & \\  & 220 mL & 47.97 (30.88) & 22.15 (14.02) & 1.778 (3); & 1.994 (2.372); & \\  & 315 mL & 45.79 (29.67) & 20.41 (11.34) & 0.156 (0.451) & 0.135 (0.437) & \\  & 365 mL & 48.38 (39.43) & 21.26 (12.26) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{LS Muscle (\%)} & Control & 63.33 (48.79) & 35.70 (26.15) & & & \\  & 220 mL & 62.86 (44.23) & 31.82 (21.41) & 0.292 (2.367); & 4.684 (1.680); & \\  & 315 mL & 60.90 (44.23) & 35.44 (23.88) & 0.784 (0.098) & 0.018 * (0.714) & \\  & 365 mL & 47.57 (48.05) & 41.08 (32.69) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{PM Muscle (\%)} & Control & 6.45 (4.00) & 10.69 (7.01) & & & \\  & 220 mL & 6.93 (4.54) & 10.11 (4.77) & 0.806 (2.476); & 0.595 (2.289); & \\  & 315 mL & 6.95 (5.20) & 10.94 (8.20) & 0.474 (0.200) & 0.576 (0.153) & \\  & 365 mL & 7.15 (4.81) & 11.15 (6.87) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{UT Muscle (\%)} & Control & 52.48 (24.58) & 31.56 (11.74) & & & \\  & 220 mL & 47.26 (21.46) & 28.29 (12.03) & 0.002 ** & 3.569 (3); & Control vs. 315 mL & 220 mL = \\  & 315 mL & 45.55 (19.84) & 29.56 (13.47) & (0.907) & 0.017 * (0.775) & = 0.135 (0.002 **) & 0.132 (0.018 *) \\  & 365 mL & 46.62 (21.21) & 31.09 (16.72) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{LT Muscle (\%)} & Control & 45.37 (26.23) & 19.75 (15.02) & 4.300 (3); & & & Control vs. 315 mL \\  & 220 mL & 49.46 (27.56) & 20.71 (16.24) & 0.007 ** & 3.051 (3); & = - 2.750 (0.047 *) & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 315 mL & 48.12 (27.00) & 20.87 (16.66) & 0.0854) & 0.032 * (0.701) & Control vs. 365 mL & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 365 mL & 49.44 (26.79) & 22.47 (17.90) & (0.854) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{LM Muscle (\%)} & Control & 36.41 (15.09) & 34.52 (11.35) & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 220 mL & 37.07 (14.96) & 34.56 (11.27) & 2.398 (3); & 0.455 (3); & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 315 mL & 37.11 (18.78) & 33.92 (11.65) & 0.073 (0.584) & 0.714 (0.139) & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 365 mL & 38.12 (14.37) & 34.66 (10.49) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Tra/IO Muscle (\%)} & Control & 19.14 (19.30) & 22.89 (24.13) & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 220 mL & 17.28 (17.03) & 23.71 (28.77) & 1.479 (3); & 0.059 (2.327); & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 315 mL & 16.86 (16.00) & 21.30 (17.58) & 0.225 (0.381) & 0.960 (0.059) & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{LM Muscle (\%)} & Control & 36.41 (15.09) & 34.52 (11.35) & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 220 mL & 37.07 (14.96) & 34.56 (11.27) & 2.398 (3); & 0.455 (3); & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 315 mL & 37.11 (18.78) & 33.92 (11.65) & 0.073 (0.584) & 0.714 (0.139) & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 365 mL & 38.12 (14.37) & 34.66 (10.49) & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Tra/IO Muscle (\%)} & Control & 19.14 (19.30) & 22.89 (24.13) & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 220 mL & 17.28 (17.03) & 23.71 (28.77) & 1.479 (3); & 0.059 (2.327); & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 315 mL & 16.86 (16.00) & 21.30 (17.58) & 0.225 (0.381) & 0.960 (0.059) & \\ \cline{1-1}  & 365 mL & 16.95 (16.66) & 23.18 (24.48) & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Mean and standard deviation (SD) of the muscle activity percentage of the reach and return phases of the FRT. Statistics of repeated measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc comparisons between implant conditions are included.