of Socioeconomic and Anthropometric Factors on Respiratory Function in Female University Students

 

Mean ±SD

Median

FVC (L)

3.57 ±0.53

3.54

FVC (%pred.)

96.4 ±13.2

96.0

FEV1 (L/s)

3.14 ±0.46

3.13

FEV1 (%pred.)

96.3 ±13.1

98.0

FEV1/FVC

0.88 ±0.09

0.90

Height (cm)

164.0 ±6.0

164.3

BMI (kg/m2)

21.8 ±3.1

21.4

CC (cm)

74.6 ±6.7

73.7

WC (cm)

70.1 ±7.2

69.6

WHtR

0.43 ±0.04

0.42

WHR

0.75 ±0.07

0.74


FVC forced vital capacity, FEV1 forced expired volume in 1 s. BMI body mass index, CC chest circumference, WC waist circumference, WHtR waist-to-height ratio, WHR waist-to-hip ratio




Table 2
Results of multifactor analyses of variance on FEV1%, FVC%, and FEV1/FVC ratio
















































































 
FVC%
FEV1%
FEV1/FVC
 
F
p
F
p
F
p

Dwelling place
0.65
0.524
0.26
0.771
1.49
0.228

Mother’s education level
1.91
0.152
2.55
0.082
0.22
0.803

Father’s education level
0.27
0.765
2.62
0.076
3.51

0.032

Number of sibilings
1.07
0.363
0.34
0.797
1.02
0.384

SES
0.81
0.447
0.59
0.555
3.15

0.046

Smoking
0.83
0.365
0.83
0.365
0.05
0.825

Allergy
0.01
0.921
0.29
0.589
0.47
0.496


SES socioeconomic status, Bold type indicates statistically significant difference (p < 0.05)


The absence of differences in spirometric parameters between smokers and non-smokers is rather surprising (Table 2). This is probably due to the fact that the subjects were young persons whose average daily cigarette consumption was relatively low. For two thirds of smokers, the period of addiction did not exceed 3 years, and one half of the subjects declared that they smoked only one or two cigarettes per day. No statistically significant differences between allergic and non-allergic individuals were noticed; this holds true for both all allergies and respiratory allergies considered separately.

In the next phase of analysis, anthropometric and spirometric parameters were tested for correlations. Results of multiple regression analysis are shown in Table 3. A statistically significant correlation was observed only for chest circumference and FVC%. Subsequently, differences in spirometric parameters depending on the body height category (short, medium, and tall) and the presence of obesity and abdominal obesity were analyzed. Because of considerable relationship between anthropometric and socio-economic parameters, these factors were tested for interactions.


Table 3
Multiple linear regression models of anthropometric indices on FEV1%, FVC%, and FEV1/FVC ratio













































































 
FVC%
FEV1%
FEV1/FVC
 
Β-coefficient
p-value
Β-coefficient
p-value
Β-coefficient
p-value

Height (cm)
0.017
0.840
0.054
0.531
0.037
0.666

BMI (kg/m2)
−0.042
0.630
−0.139
0.120
−0.099
0.272

CC (cm)
0.292

0.039

0.104
0.469
−0.241
0.096

WC (cm)
−0.009
0.946
0.068
0.627
0.093
0.508

WHtR
−0.082
0.335
−0.044
0.608
0.072
0.409

WHR
0.131
0.120
0.162
0.060
0.040
0.643
 
R2 = 0.06; F(6.13) = 2.54; p = 0.023
R2 = 0.02; F(6.13) = 1.58; p = 0.158
R2 = 0.01; F(6.13) = 1.32; p = 0.250


BMI body mass index, CC chest circumference, WC waist circumference, WHtR waist-to-height ratio, WHR waist-to-hip ratio, Bold type statistically significant difference (p < 0.05)

Tall subjects had a much higher mean FVC% than medium-height or short persons. Increased FEV1% and lower FEV1/FVC ratio were observed in tall individuals in comparison to medium-height and short subjects. However, the differences were not statistically significant. A comparison of underweight, normal body mass, and overweight or obese subjects revealed statistically significant differences for FVC% and FEV1/FVC. The highest values of the indices were reported for subjects with normal body weight (BMI 18.5–25.0 kg/m2). A similar tendency was found also for FEV1%, although without a statistically significant difference. No statistically significant differences for spirometric parameters depending on the presence of abdominal obesity were found. Nevertheless, a clear tendency was identified for individuals with abdominal obesity determined both by the waist size criterion and the WHtR and WHR criterions: such individuals were characterized by lower FVC% and FEV1% and a higher FEV1/FVC ratio (Table 4).


Table 4
FEV1%, FVC%, and FEV1/FVC ratio in relation to anthropometric variables







































































   
n
FVC (%pred.)
FEV1 (%pred.)
FEV1/FVC

Height (cm)
Short
27
95.1 ± 14.2
93.7 ±16.2
0.89 ±0.09

Medium
107
96.3 ± 13.2
96.1 ±11.9
0.89 ±0.09

Tall
18
104.3 ± 11.4
101.1 ±10.0
0.86 ±0.07
 
F =2.98
F = 1.69
F = 1.02

p = 0.110
p = 0.189
p = 0.363

BMI (kg/m2)
<18.5
16
89.1 ± 16.1
93.4 ±18.1
0.88 ±0.08

18.5–25.0
116
102.3 ± 13.0
97.9 ±12.3
0.91 ±0.12

>25
20
95.5 ± 12.2
95.1 ±12.4
0.85 ±0.07
 
F= 4.09

F = 0.48
F = 2.63

p = 0.010

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Related posts:

  1. of Estrogen-Related Traits with Allergic Rhinitis
  2. Influenza Diagnostic Tests Improve Suitability of Antiviral Treatment in Hospitalized Children
  3. Vaccination Coverage Among Polish Patients with Chronic Diseases
  4. Wavelet Power as a Biomarker of Antidepressant Treatment Response in Bipolar Depression

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Tags:
Jul 14, 2017 | Posted by in RESPIRATORY | Comments Off on of Socioeconomic and Anthropometric Factors on Respiratory Function in Female University Students

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

 Get Clinical Tree app for offline access