Contact No: +91-8826373757 | +91-8826859373 | 011-25052216
Email: rakesh.its@gmail.com | editor@innovativepublication.com

Indian Journal of Clinical Anatomy and Physiology


Effects of sedentary life style on respiratory rates and peak expiratory flow rate among medical students


Full Text PDF Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Author Details: Sukanya Badami, Mahesh Baragundi

Volume : 4

Issue : 1

Online ISSN : 2394-2126

Print ISSN : 2394-2118

Article First Page : 100

Article End Page : 103


Abstract

Introduction: Physical fitness is required not only by athletes for better performance but also by non-athletes for maintenance of physical and mental health. Heavy academic workloads in medical schools make it difficult for medical students to maintain a regular exercise program. Physical Education class provides a great variety of activities and high intensity exercises for students.
Objectives: The current study was undertaken to compare Resting, peak exercise, 5 min after exercise respiratory rates and respiratory rate recovery following Astrand-Ryhming step test and Peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR) between students of Medical Education (ME) and Physical Education (PE).
Methods: Study was conducted on 50 healthy male medical students and 50 healthy age matched male physical education students after completion of 9 months of course in the college. Respiratory rate in cycles/ min was recorded for three times. First before the step test, second immediately from 15 seconds to 30 seconds after the test and third time at 5 min after the test without the knowledge of the subject. Respiratory rates were recorded as RRR, RRE and RR5 respectively. Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR) in lit/min was recorded using mini Wright’s Peak Flow meter.
Results: All the respiratory rates were lower in PE students than ME students and all the differences were statistically highly significant. The increase in respiratory rate at the end of ARST over pretest was significantly lower in PE students (10.7±3.8 cycles/min) than ME students (16.6±5.8 cycles/min). The rise in respiratory rate after exercise was less in PE students than ME students. Percent recovery respiratory rate 5 min after ARST was significantly higher in PE students (75.70%) than ME students (40.96%). The mean PEFR±1SD was more in PE students (569.1±30.8) than ME students (479.8±67.6) and the difference was statistically highly significant.
Conclusion: The present study revealed that the important parameters of pulmonary fitness were significantly better in PE students than ME students. These health beneficial effects can be attributed to the regular physical training schedules of PE.

Keywords:
Respiratory Rate, PEFR, Medical Education