| Literature DB >> 36184644 |
Han Zhang1, Lu Sun2, Ye Yu1, Hong Xin3, Li Wu1, Fengmei Yang1, Jie Liu1, Zhuo Zhang4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the associations between body composition and vital capacity index (VCI) among medical students of Shenyang, China. STUDYEntities:
Keywords: Body composition; Fat mass; Medical students; Obesity; Vital capacity index
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36184644 PMCID: PMC9526916 DOI: 10.1186/s12890-022-02176-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pulm Med ISSN: 1471-2466 Impact factor: 3.320
Fig. 1The flow chart of the study enrollment
Characteristics of the participants
| Characteristic | Total (2063) | Male (717) | Female (1346) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 20.398 ± 1.264 | 20.515 ± 1.248 | 20.337 ± 1.269 | 0.002 |
| Height (cm) | 167.182 ± 8.039 | 175.061 ± 6.027 | 162.985 ± 5.387 | < 0.001 |
| Weight (Kg) | 61.412 ± 12.786 | 70.292 ± 13.406 | 56.682 ± 9.515 | < 0.001 |
| BMI (Kg/m2) | 21.867 ± 3.597 | 22.896 ± 3.937 | 21.319 ± 3.273 | < 0.001 |
| FM (Kg) | 14.831 ± 5.877 | 12.960 ± 6.099 | 15.828 ± 5.504 | < 0.001 |
| FFM (Kg) | 46.584 ± 9.945 | 57.332 ± 8.115 | 40.859 ± 4.709 | < 0.001 |
| PM (Kg) | 9.573 ± 2.071 | 11.810 ± 1.691 | 8.381 ± 0.982 | < 0.001 |
| TBW (Kg) | 33.941 ± 7.339 | 41.873 ± 5.989 | 29.715 ± 3.474 | < 0.001 |
| MM (Kg) | 3.070 ± 0.534 | 3.648 ± 0.436 | 2.763 ± 0.253 | < 0.001 |
| VC (ml) | 3843.482 ± 1005.305 | 4883.842 ± 775.702 | 3289.293 ± 587.144 | < 0.001 |
| VCI (ml/kg) | 63.811 ± 12.972 | 71.783 ± 12.494 | 59.564 ± 11.089 | < 0.001 |
BMI Body mass index, FM Fat mass, FFM Fat-free mass, PM Protein mass, TBW Total body water, MM Mineral mass, VC Vital capacity, VCI Vital capacity index
Fig. 2Scatter plot of the correlation between FM (A), FFM (B) and VCI (A–B)
Stepwise multiple linear regression of VCI on body composition indices
| Male | Model I | FM | − 1.169(− 1.293,− 1.046) | − 0.571 | 0.063 | − 18.591 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
| Model II | FM | − 1.173(− 1.296,− 1.050) | − 0.573 | 0.063 | − 18.730 | < 0.001 | 1.001 | |
| Female | Model I | FM | − 0.826(− 0.924,− 0.728) | − 0.410 | 0.050 | − 16.479 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
| Model II | FM | − 0.827(− 0.926,− 0.729) | − 0.411 | 0.050 | − 16.519 | < 0.001 | 1.000 |
FM Fat mass. Model II was adjusted for student’s age and nationality
Fig.3Scatter plot of the Pearson correlation between FM and VCI in different BMI groups