Skip to main content
. 2023 May 16;10(5):ENEURO.0429-22.2023. doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0429-22.2023

Table 1.

Summary of statistical analysis used to characterize the Evoked Synaptic Activity Potential (ESAP)

Figure Measurement Comparison N Statistical test Results
S1 (ESAP) amplitude Control vs CNQX 14 Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.0001
ECAP amplitude Control vs CNQX 14 Wilcoxon signed-rank test p = 0.0562
Spinal stimulation evoked S1 (ESAP)
latency
Intraspinal vs epidural response 10 Paired sample t test t(9) = 1.35, p = 0.38
Motor cortical stimulation evoked S1 (ESAP)
latency
Intraspinal vs epidural response 10 Paired sample t test t(9) = 1.73, p = 0.15
Current thresholds S1 vs EMG 9 Paired sample t test t(8) = 6.04, p < 0.0001
Latencies S1 vs EMG 9 Paired sample t test t(8) = 15.7, p < 0.0001
7A S1 (ESAP) amplitude during 50-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 6.5162, p = 8.4244e-10
7A S1 (ESAP) amplitude during 1-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 1.3284, p = 0.1898
7B ECAP amplitude during 50-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 1.2822, p = 0.2188
7B ECAP amplitude during 1-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.3226, p = 0.9964
7D S1 (ESAP) latency during 50-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.75, p = 0.7579
7C S1 (ESAP) latency during 1-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.23, p = 0.9996
7D ECAP (N1) latency during 50-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.02, p = 1
7C ECAP (N1) latency during 1-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 1.73, p = 0.049
7D ECAP (P2) latency during 50-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.06, p = 1
7C ECAP (P2) latency during 1-Hz SCS Increasing stimulation pulse count (1–20) 5 One-way ANOVA F(19,80) = 0.95, p = 0.5225