Table 2.
Time | Location | N | Mean | Std. Deviation | 95% Confidence… | 95% Confidence… | Minimum | Maximum | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||
Lower boundary | Upper boundary | ||||||||
0 min | Cecum | 7 | 62.1 | 24.8 | 39.1 | 85.1 | 41.2 | 111.7 | .55 |
Ileum | 5 | 73.8 | 41.6 | 22.1 | 125.5 | 41.2 | 133.8 | ||
30 min | Cecum | 7 | 91.1 | 32.8 | 60.8 | 121.5 | 41.2 | 127.8 | .02 |
Ileum | 5 | 138.1 | 17.7 | 116.1 | 160.2 | 115.0 | 154.3 | ||
60 min | Cecum | 6 | 102.1 | 39.6 | 60.5 | 143.7 | 52.6 | 162.0 | .04 |
Ileum | 5 | 149.5 | 23.3 | 120.6 | 178.4 | 126.2 | 177.1 | ||
90 min | Cecum | 7 | 119.6 | 37.5 | 84.9 | 154.2 | 52.6 | 163.5 | .04 |
Ileum | 5 | 165.7 | 24.3 | 135.6 | 195.9 | 140.3 | 196.9 | ||
120 min | Cecum | 7 | 130.3 | 36.7 | 96.4 | 164.2 | 81.6 | 184.5 | .23 |
Ileum | 5 | 155.5 | 29.1 | 119.3 | 191.7 | 113.8 | 187.0 |
Comparisons performed by repeated measures ANOVA. There was a significant difference between cecum and ileum at 30-, 60- and 90-minutes. P values <.05 were considered significant.