Table 4.
Effects of subject position and time on cognitive performance in normative control subjects.
| PPB time (s) | RFT deviation (degrees) | Cube accuracy | Card time (s) | SOT-5M% | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group:a | ||||||
| Δ Supine | β | 18.23 | 13.56 | − | ||
| p | <0.001 | <0.001 | − | |||
| Time:b | ||||||
| Δ N1 | β | −9.40 | 7.40 | |||
| p | 0.006 | 0.039 | ||||
| Δ N50 | β | |||||
| p | ||||||
| Δ N90 | β | −10.34 | ||||
| p | 0.033 |
aDifference compaired to seated position; bdifference from N−12; PPB, Purdue pegboard test; RFT, rod and frame test; Cube, 3D cube rotation test; Card, 2D card rotation test; SOT-5M, sensory organization test 5 with head movement; BR, bed rest; β, parameter estimate; Note: no post hoc tests for interaction were significant; columns for the digit symbol substitution test, speed of the cube rotation task, accuracy of the card rotation task, the functional mobility test, and the senosry organization test 5 without head movement are not presented because none of the post hoc tests was significant.