The assessment of pulmonary function is an essential component in evaluating respiratory health and physical performance. Parameters such as Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) serve as reliable indicators of airway function and lung volume, respectively (1). PEF reflects the maximum speed of expiration, while FVC measures the total amount of air that can be forcibly exhaled after full inspiration. These parameters are influenced by various factors including age, sex, body composition, and notably, the level of physical activity (2,3).

Regular physical activity, particularly among competitive athletes, is associated with improved lung function due to enhanced ventilatory mechanics, increased respiratory muscle strength, and better alveolar ventilation (4,5). In contrast, sedentary lifestyles, commonly observed among office workers, may contribute to reduced pulmonary capacity and a higher risk of respiratory disorders over time (6). The comparison between physically active and sedentary individuals provides valuable insights into the role of exercise in maintaining and enhancing pulmonary health.

Previous studies have demonstrated that athletes exhibit significantly higher PEF and FVC values compared to their sedentary counterparts, suggesting adaptive physiological changes associated with endurance and strength training (7,8). However, limited data exist on such comparisons in the Indian context, especially concerning occupational groups such as office workers who are prone to prolonged periods of physical inactivity.

This study aims to assess and compare PEF and FVC among competitive athletes and office workers to identify potential respiratory health disparities and highlight the importance of integrating physical activity into sedentary lifestyles as a preventive health measure.

The study population consisted of 100 male participants aged between 20 and 35 years, divided into two groups: Group A included 50 competitive athletes involved in regular structured training for at least 5 days per week, while Group B comprised 50 sedentary office workers with predominantly desk-based occupations and no routine physical training.

Inclusion criteria for both groups included nonsmokers with no history of chronic respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease, or recent respiratory infection. Individuals with any history of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), or other systemic illnesses affecting lung function were excluded.

Anthropometric measurements including height and weight were recorded to calculate body mass index (BMI). Pulmonary function was assessed using a portable digital spirometer (MIR Spirolab III), calibrated prior to each testing session according to manufacturer instructions. Each participant was instructed to perform the tests following American Thoracic Society (ATS) guidelines, including taking a deep inhalation followed by a rapid and forceful expiration into the mouthpiece. The best of three consistent efforts was recorded for each participant to ensure reproducibility and accuracy.

The primary parameters evaluated were Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) in liters per minute (L/min) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) in liters (L). All measurements were performed in a seated position, with participants wearing a nose clip to prevent nasal air leakage.

Data were entered into Microsoft Excel and analyzed using SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics including mean and standard deviation were calculated. Independent t-tests were used to compare mean PEF and FVC values between the two groups. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

The study analyzed pulmonary function parameters among two groups: competitive athletes (Group A) and office workers (Group B), each consisting of 50 participants. The demographic and anthropometric data are summarized in Table 1. The mean age of participants in Group A was 24.8 ± 3.1 years, while that in Group B was 25.2 ± 2.9 years. The BMI was marginally lower among athletes (22.6 ± 1.8 kg/m²) compared to office workers (24.1 ± 2.2 kg/m²), though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.061).

Pulmonary function values, including Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), are shown in Table 2. Athletes demonstrated significantly higher mean PEF values (540.2 ± 45.7 L/min) than office workers (429.6 ± 38.4 L/min), with a p-value of <0.001. Similarly, the mean FVC was considerably greater in Group A (5.08 ± 0.62 L) compared to Group B (3.92 ± 0.54 L), also showing statistical significance (p < 0.001).

These results suggest that regular physical activity, as seen in competitive athletes, is associated with enhanced pulmonary function compared to sedentary individuals.

Table 1. Demographic and Anthropometric Characteristics of Participants

*Significant at p < 0.05

Table 2. Comparison of Pulmonary Function Parameters Between Groups

*Statistically significant (p < 0.05)

The data (Table 2) clearly indicate that competitive athletes exhibit significantly better pulmonary performance compared to their sedentary counterparts, reinforcing the benefits of regular physical exercise on respiratory efficiency.

The present study revealed that competitive athletes exhibited significantly higher Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) values compared to sedentary office workers. These findings highlight the beneficial effects of regular physical training on pulmonary function, reinforcing the role of physical activity in preventive respiratory health.

The significantly greater PEF values among athletes may be attributed to enhanced expiratory muscle strength and improved airway patency resulting from consistent aerobic and anaerobic training (1,2). Forced vital capacity, a measure of lung volume, was also markedly higher in the athlete group, which can be linked to increased thoracic mobility, diaphragmatic efficiency, and lung compliance developed through prolonged physical exertion (3,4).

Our results align with prior studies that reported superior pulmonary parameters in athletic populations compared to non-athletic individuals. For instance, Mehrotra et al. observed that Indian athletes demonstrated significantly elevated FVC and PEF values compared to sedentary controls, attributing this to the physiological adaptations from sports participation (5). Similar outcomes were also noted by Lakhera et al., who found higher lung volumes among endurance-trained athletes, likely due to greater respiratory muscle development (6).

In contrast, sedentary individuals, such as office workers included in this study, tend to have reduced ventilatory efficiency, possibly due to poor posture, restricted chest expansion, and lack of physical conditioning (7). Chronic physical inactivity is known to negatively affect respiratory muscle performance and overall lung function, potentially increasing the risk of pulmonary complications over time (8).

The positive correlation observed between physical activity and pulmonary function in this study is supported by previous literature indicating that exercise interventions can improve FVC, PEF, and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁), even among individuals with compromised respiratory health (9,10). Furthermore, aerobic conditioning has been shown to enhance the efficiency of gas exchange, improve oxygen delivery to tissues, and reduce ventilation-perfusion mismatch, thereby contributing to overall respiratory health (11,12).

It is also worth noting that pulmonary function is influenced by multiple variables, including age, sex, body size, and ethnicity (13). Although the participants in both groups were age- and sex-matched, slight variations in BMI and height may have contributed to the differences observed in lung function. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the differences in pulmonary parameters strongly suggests that physical activity remains a primary determinant.

Additionally, lung function improvements in athletes may vary depending on the type of sport. Sports involving sustained aerobic activity, such as swimming, running, and cycling, tend to produce greater respiratory adaptations compared to anaerobic or skill-based sports (14). Future studies may consider categorizing athletes based on their specific sports discipline to further delineate these effects.

The current findings emphasize the need for public health strategies to encourage physical activity in sedentary populations, particularly among office workers. Incorporating workplace fitness programs, promoting active commuting, and raising awareness about respiratory fitness may help mitigate the long-term consequences of sedentary behavior on lung function (15).

This study demonstrates that competitive athletes have significantly higher peak expiratory flow and forced vital capacity compared to sedentary office workers, indicating better pulmonary function. Regular physical activity plays a crucial role in maintaining respiratory health, and incorporating exercise into daily routines should be encouraged as a preventive strategy against declining lung function.

1. Bertholon JF, Carles J, Teillac A. Assessment of ventilatory performance of athletes using the maximal expiratory flow-volume curve. Int J Sports Med. 1986;7(2):80-5. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1025738. PMID: 3710666.
2. Rong C, Bei H, Yun M, Yuzhu W, Mingwu Z. Lung function and cytokine levels in professional athletes. J Asthma. 2008;45(4):343-8. doi:10.1080/02770900801956371. PMID: 18446601.
3. Fujii T. [Influence of aging on respiratory function with emphasis on senile persons]. Nichidai Koko Kagaku. 1990;16(2):164-74. PMID: 2135608. Japanese.
4. Viljanen AA, Halttunen PK, Kreus KE, Viljanen BC. Spirometric studies in non-smoking, healthy adults. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl. 1982;159:5-20. PMID: 6957974.
5. Zaba R. [A twenty-year research on the pathogenesis of functional disorders of the respiratory tract in children and adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis]. Wiad Lek. 2002;55 Suppl 1(Pt 2):998-1002. PMID: 17474634. Polish.
6. Goić-Barisić I, Bradarić A, Erceg M, Barisić I, Foretić N, Pavlov N, Tocilj J. Influence of passive smoking on basic anthropometric characteristics and respiratory function in young athletes. Coll Antropol. 2006;30(3):615-9. PMID: 17058533.
7. Fischer R, Lang SM, Bergner A, Huber RM. Monitoring of expiratory flow rates and lung volumes during a high altitude expedition. Eur J Med Res. 2005;10(11):469-74. PMID: 16354600.
8. Meguro T, Tsubota N, Ogata M. Discriminant analysis of bronchial asthma by linear discriminant function with parameters of flow-volumes: discriminant analysis of bronchial asthma in young male non-smokers. Acta Med Okayama. 1978;32(5):355-61. PMID: 153096.
9. Chhabra SK, Vatsa HK. Advantages of late expiratory relaxation during maximal forced expiratory maneuver. Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci. 2001;43(4):205-10. PMID: 18610663.
10. Neukirch F, Korobaeff M, Perdrizet S. [Flow-volume curves in healthy children and adolescents 10-19 years of age. Reference values and lower limits of the normal]. Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir. 1982;18(5):725-41. PMID: 6927529. French.
11. Muraki H. [Effects on flow volume curve accompanied by aging--with emphasis on the relation between the change and FEV1.0%]. Nichidai Koko Kagaku. 1989;15(4):423-30. PMID: 2489810. Japanese.
12. Leeder SR, Swan AV, Peat JK, Woolcook AJ, Blackburn CR. Maximum expiratory flow-volume curves in children: changes with growth and individual variability. Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir. 1977;13(2):249-60. PMID: 861421.
13. Mok JY, Simpson H. Pulmonary function in severe chronic asthma in children during apparent clinical remission. Eur J Respir Dis. 1983;64(7):487-93. PMID: 6628583.
14. Huang G, Liu G, Huang J. [Study of peak expiratory flow in 728 normal adolescents in Chengdu area]. Hua Xi Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2001;32(3):427-9. PMID: 12536584. Chinese.
15. Evers H, Herrmann H, Ohme G. [Value of the maximal expiratory flow-volume diagram in a longitudinal study]. Z Erkr Atmungsorgane. 1985;165(2):134-42. PMID: 4082657. German.