## 3 Results
### Full-Body Joint Range of Motion (RoM)  
One-way ANOVA repeated measures showed that the variation in compression garments imposed significant effects on the ROM of head flexion (\(p\) = 0.014, partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.169), trunk lateral bending (\(p\) = 0.024, partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.152), left shoulder flexion (\(p\) = 0.041, partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.152), right shoulder rotation (\(p\) = 0.048, partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.128) and left knee flexion (\(p\) = 0.003, partial \(\eta^{2}\) = 0.212). Post hoc pairwise comparison showed that the top condition significantly reduced the head flexion (\(p\) = 0.037; d = 0.503; 1.346, 95% CI 0.376 to 2.315) and trunk lateral bending (\(p\) = 0.042; d = 0.487; 1.039, 95% CI 0.041 to 2.036) ROM compared with the control-pre condition (Table 4). Similarly, the full condition significantly reduced head flexion (\(p\) = 0.009; d = 0.650; 1.346, 95% CI 0.376 to 2.315) and trunk lateral bending (\(p\) = 0.028; d = 0.532; 1.446, 95% CI 0.173 to 2.718) ROM compared to the control-pre condition.  
Compared to that of the bottom condition, both the top (\(p\) = 0.01; d = 0.642; 3.422, 95% CI 0.929 to 5.915) and full (\(p\) = 0.003; d = 0.778; 3.530, 95% CI 1.405 to 5.655) conditions significantly reduced the ROM of the left shoulder flexion, while the top condition had significantly larger right shoulder rotation compared with the control-pre (\(p\) = 0.013; d = 0.611; 38.316, 95% CI -8.98 to 67.65) and bottom (\(p\) = 0.041; d = 0.491; 23.028, 95% CI 1.08 to 44.976) conditions (Table 5). The control-pre condition  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Range of Motion, Mean (Standard Deviation)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**ANOVA Repeated Measure**} \\ \hline  & **Control-Pre** & **Top** & **Bottom** & **Full** & **Effect Size** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline Head FL/EX & 10.57 (3.81) & 9.53 (3.1) * & 9.75 (3.37) & 9.22 (3.07) * & 0.169 & 0.014 * \\ Head lateral bending & 6.14 (2.83) & 5.80 (2.69) & 6.05 (2.99) & 5.87 (2.62) & 0.019 * & 0.694 \\ Head axial rotation & 13.17 (8.04) & 17.11 (12.74) & 15.02 (10.49) & 14.42 (8.63) & 0.053 & 0.368 \\ Trunk FL/EX & 19.20 (6.24) & 17.15 (5.96) & 18.43 (5.85) & 18.15 (6.42) & 0.11 & 0.082 \\ Trunk lateral bending & 10.21 (4.24) & 9.17 (4.38) & 9.88 (8.63) & 8.77 (4.01) * & 0.152 & 0.024 * \\ Trunk axial rotation & 11.05 (4.56) & 11.46 (5.04) & 10.99 (4.36) & 11.39 (4.37) & 0.018 * & 0.687 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA repeated measures outcome of the range of motion of head and trunk in different compression garment conditions.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Condition**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Performance Score**} \\ \cline{2-4}  & **Control-Pre** & **Top** & **Bottom** & **Full** \\ \hline Control-Pre & & 0.018 * & 0.230 & 0.035 * \\ Top & 0.296 & & 0.152 & 0.888 \\ Bottom & 0.227 & 0.654 & & 0.159 \\ Full & 0.107 & 0.794 & 0.344 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Probability values (\(p\)-value) of the average (upper right triangle) and coefficient of variation (lower left triangle) of the free-throw performance score.  
had significantly larger left knee flexion ROM than the bottom (\(p\) = 0.026; d = 0.539; 2.605, 95% CI 0.345 to 4.864) and full (\(p\) = 0.002; d = 0.804; 2.908, 95% CI 1.214 to 4.602) conditions. Similarly, the top condition had a significantly larger left knee flexion ROM than the bottom (\(p\) = 0.044; d = 0.482; 2.047, 95% CI 0.059 to 4.035) and full (\(p\) = 0.018; d = 0.585; 2.351, 95% CI, 0.469 to 4.232) conditions (Table 6).