Table 5. Summary of the significant differences found from the Friedman test of the intra-rater reliability.

Assessment	Significant differences between the parameters from the four assessment tests
ROM a	pROM in pronation (p = 0.03)
WORKSPACE b	No significant differences
QOM	D-P ratio to start for target 1 (p = 0.003) (test 1 → test 3/4);D-P ratio to target for target 2 (p = 0.033) (test 1 → test 2); Precision on target 1 (p = 0.008) (test 1 → test 3/4); Reaction time to target for target 2 (p = 0.041) (not sign. post hoc);Reaction time to target for target 7 (p = 0.045) (not sign. post hoc);Reaction time to start for target 6 (p = 0.048) (test 2 → test 4)
STRENGTH	Hand opening (p = 0.013) (test 1 → test3)
RPM	Shoulder external rotation 60°/s (p = 0.001) (test 2 → test 4); Elbow flexion 60°/s (p = 0.018) (not sign. post hoc)

^aAs healthy subjects almost exclusively reached the mechanical limits ROM values correspond in most cases to the mechanical end limit.

^bThe maximal workspace levels and therefore the maximal cubic volume were reached for the evaluated subjects for all the directions (p = 1.00).