Download the article in pdf format
Publication date: 01.12.2023
DOI: 10.24412/2782-6570-2023_02_04_9
UDC 796.01;612
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF STUDENTS IN NIZHNY NOVGOROD AND NIZHNY NOVGOROD OBLAST
S.V. Mikhajlova1, T.V. Khrycheva2, E.A. Boltacheva3, N.V. Zhulin3
1Arzamas branch of the Lobachevsky University, Arzamas, Russia
2Arzamas City Hospital No 1, Arzamas, Russia
3Arzamas Central City Hospital, Arzamas, Russia
Annotation. The article presents the results of a comparative analysis of the standards for the physical development of students, developed in 1990, in 2017 and in 2019 for boys and girls of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast. The differences found during the study confirm the need to use evaluation tables of different territorial levels, i.e. for students from Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast. The larger number of the examined in the development of the standard for students of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast allowed to create rating scales for each age and gender group, which makes it possible to obtain more informative results when evaluating the physical development of young boys and girls.
Keywords: students, centile method, standards of physical development, rating scales.
Introduction. Individual and collective estimation of the students’ morphofunctional development is necessary to implement preventive and therapeutic measures for student groups. Scientific studies justify using the centile method in assessment of physical development (PD) of growing generation [1-2].
The centile method is the simplest non-parametric method in statistics. It may be used in an analysis of continuous values with distribution of any type, because it takes into account the real boundaries of the series for each attribute and does not shift the estimation towards underestimation or overestimation of the standard [3]. The centile scales show boundaries of a studied attribute, they include maximal and minimal values of each parameter. Application of such tables is easy and convenient. Each attribute is placed in a certain interval of the scale, which has its own name as an estimation of corresponding value of an index. There are 8 uneven centile intervals (CI), each of which has its own name. For example, 5CI or a median divides an order sample in half [4-5].
In Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (earlier called Gorky Oblast), physical development of schoolchildren and students is regularly monitored and standards are periodically adjusted [1-4, 6-8]. The first comprehensive monitoring of students’ health to develop PD standards was conducted in Gorky in the Ministry of Healthcare’s targeted integrated program titled “Students’ health”. In 1987-1988, an anthropometric examination of students from 6 different universities of Gorky took place. Taking the results of the examination that included 1953 students into account, standards of PD were developed (published in 1990) using parametric and non-parametric methods of statistical analysis, which showed that for most of the studied attributes, the morphofunctional status formation in young men and women is completed by 20-21 years. The average values of body length in young men were 176.8 cm and 163.3 cm in young women, body mass – 71.0 kg and 60.1 kg respectively [1].
In 2013-2015, experts of the Privolzhsky Research Medical University (earlier called the Nizhny Novgorod State Medical Academy) conducted a study on PD of 2315 students (687 young men and 1628 young women) aged 17-30 years from 9 universities of Nizhny Novgorod, which included the generalized method in compliance with the unified PD research methodology. Results of the examination that included 1953 students served as a foundation for PD standards (published in 2017) based on the centile method [2, 7].
Studentship is a time interval that defines end of growing, hormonal and functional maturation of the body, its stabilization. The data obtained reflect transformation of these processes among the youth in connection with the global secular trend, which dictates the need for periodic examinations and adjustment of standards [7, 9].
There is an issue related to special and temporal limits. Temporal limits are based on PD indices, reflect changes in living conditions, motor activity, nutrition, health state, environment et al, depend on age and lifestyle. Spatial limits depend on genetic and ethnic features of the examined population group, which reflects a need to use rating tables of various territorial level differing not only by nationality, but also by place of residence: for urban and rural populations [7, 10].
Objective of the study – to conduct a comparative analysis of PD standards of students from Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast, which were developed in 1990, 2017 and 2019.
Methods and organization. In order to achieve the set task, we made a comparative analysis of 3 PD standards:
1 – the PD standards of Gorky students (1990) [1];
2 – the PD standards of Nizhny Novgorod students (2017) [7];
3 – the PD standards of students of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019), developed by the authors in the dissertation research based on the results of a survey dated 2012-2017 of 7180 students aged 17-25 years [6].
The study was carried out using the generalized method among students from Nizhny Novgorod (Privolzhsky Research Medical University and Lobachevsky University, whose main place of residence are the districts of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast), Arzamas (Arzamas branch of the Lobachevsky University, Arzamas Polytechnic University, Arzamas branch of the Russian University of Cooperation) during the educational process when studying the disciplines of the medical and physical education block and during preventive examinations in the Health Centers.
The anthropometric measurements included identification of body length (BL), body mass (BM), chest girth (CG), vital capacity (VC), right hand dynamometry (RHD), systolic and diastolic blood pressure (sBP and dBP), heart rate (HR), respiration tests on inhale and exhale [3, 11].
Taking the examination results into account, we created a personalized database, the statistical data processing was carried out with EXCEL v 8.00 and Version 4.03 Primer of Biostatistics. To fulfill the objectives of the study, the centile method was used. The chi-square test (χ2) was applied to assess the reliability of the results. The differences deemed statistically significant if р<0.05.
Results and discussion. The examined students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2012-2017) were estimated according to two aforementioned standards, we also conducted the comparative analysis of the obtained results.
Analysis of PD indices demonstrated deviation from the reference in distribution of centile rating of total body dimensions. Distriburion of BL and BM indices assessed according to the 2017 standards were close to reference values. However, when evaluating BL according to the 1990 standards, we can notice a right-sided displacement, which means that modern young men and women are taller than 30 years ago (table 1).
Table 1
Distribution of morphological indices’ rating, %
|
CI |
Ref |
BL |
BM |
CG |
|||||||||
|
young men |
young women |
young men |
young women |
young men |
young women |
||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
||
|
1 |
3% |
2.5 |
7.8 |
2.2 |
2.5 |
3.9 |
2.6 |
4.1 |
0.9 |
3.2 |
1.2 |
4.9 |
12.9 |
|
2 |
7% |
5.9 |
4.6 |
4.6 |
5.3 |
9.1 |
9.5 |
10.2 |
3.7 |
8.0 |
21.8 |
10.0 |
17.0 |
|
3 |
15% |
10.5 |
13.6 |
5.9 |
10.2 |
16.6 |
2.1 |
21.0 |
9.2 |
13.9 |
19.4 |
15.8 |
14.2 |
|
4 |
25% |
16.5 |
29.3 |
16.2 |
23.2 |
26.4 |
26.5 |
24.9 |
36.7 |
25.2 |
13.0 |
22.6 |
18.3 |
|
5 |
25% |
32.5 |
20.9 |
26.0 |
33.5 |
24.4 |
20.6 |
19.4 |
21.6 |
22.5 |
27.7 |
21.4 |
18.4 |
|
6 |
15% |
16.6 |
12.1 |
23.1 |
14.8 |
9.6 |
11.8 |
11.0 |
12.1 |
15.6 |
12.1 |
11.2 |
12.3 |
|
7 |
7% |
10.7 |
9.2 |
11.9 |
6.5 |
4.8 |
6.4 |
7.4 |
12.2 |
6.8 |
4.2 |
9.9 |
4.2 |
|
8 |
3% |
4.8 |
2.5 |
10.1 |
3.9 |
5.1 |
1.5 |
2.1 |
3.6 |
4.8 |
0.5 |
4.1 |
2.7 |
|
Statistical data |
χ2=10.06 p=0.023 |
χ2=9.09 p=0.036 |
χ2=2.37 p=0.68 |
χ2=13.72 p=0.004 |
χ2=16.62 p=0.001 |
χ2=9.09 p=0.036 |
|||||||
Note: CI – centile interval; BL – body length; BM – body mass; CG – chest girth; Ref – reference; 1 – rating according to the 1990 standards; 2 – rating according to the 2017 standards.
Left-sided asymmetry in rating distribution was revealed both in young men and women in CG and RHD indices (which means that low values of such indices are predominant), as well as in BM index in young men according to the 2017 standards. The right-sided asymmetry in students is characterized by the rating distribution of sBP, as well as VC in young women according to the 1990 standards (tables 2, 3).
There was a significant deviation from the reference of dBP’s rating distribution associated with uneven CI in the 1990 and 2017 standards (table 3).
Table 2
Distribution of physiometric indices’ rating, %
|
CI |
Ref |
VC |
RHD |
||||||
|
young men |
young women |
young men |
young women |
||||||
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
||
|
1 |
3% |
3.2 |
0.9 |
1.2 |
0.3 |
17.6 |
9.5 |
18.0 |
11.2 |
|
2 |
7% |
10.1 |
8.6 |
6.4 |
2.8 |
22.1 |
9.8 |
15.8 |
8.4 |
|
3 |
15% |
11.7 |
12.9 |
8.8 |
7.8 |
24.0 |
18.4 |
17.5 |
11.9 |
|
4 |
25% |
24.6 |
17.1 |
11.1 |
17.2 |
15.5 |
29.4 |
20.1 |
24.9 |
|
5 |
25% |
22.4 |
26.1 |
30.2 |
30.3 |
12.6 |
15.2 |
12.3 |
18.9 |
|
6 |
15% |
15.7 |
22.2 |
20.8 |
25.1 |
4.7 |
11.0 |
10.1 |
9.8 |
|
7 |
7% |
7.3 |
8.4 |
10.4 |
10.0 |
2.3 |
3.0 |
2.6 |
11.1 |
|
8 |
3% |
4.9 |
3.7 |
11.1 |
6.4 |
1.3 |
3.6 |
3.7 |
3.8 |
|
Statistical data |
χ2=4.07 |
χ2=4.01 |
χ2=15.78 |
χ2=12.25 |
|||||
Note: CI – centile interval; VC – vital capacity; RHD – right hand dynamometry; Ref – reference; 1 – rating according to the 1990 standards; 2 – rating according to the 2017 standards.
Table 3
Distribution of hemodynamic indices’ rating, %
|
CI |
Ref |
HR |
sBP |
dBP |
|||||||||
|
young men |
young women |
young men |
young women |
young men |
young women |
||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
||
|
1 |
3% |
3.7 |
1.7 |
4.3 |
2.4 |
0.2 |
4.3 |
1.6 |
2.1 |
0.3 |
1.1 |
2.1 |
3.2 |
|
2 |
7% |
2.0 |
5.2 |
5.3 |
4.2 |
1.9 |
3.1 |
1.1 |
4.1 |
0.3 |
4.7 |
0.3 |
3.3 |
|
3 |
15% |
17.2 |
7.7 |
18.4 |
10.6 |
1.6 |
18.1 |
15.7 |
19.4 |
3.8 |
28.7 |
1.7 |
12.9 |
|
4 |
25% |
15.9 |
41.5 |
14.5 |
26.4 |
30.3 |
43.5 |
8.5 |
24.4 |
3.0 |
37.2 |
13.5 |
13.7 |
|
5 |
25% |
27.9 |
25.3 |
31.4 |
27.0 |
20.8 |
10.4 |
27.6 |
19.0 |
56.4 |
16.5 |
9.4 |
27.9 |
|
6 |
15% |
22.5 |
11.7 |
14.2 |
18.6 |
31.9 |
11.7 |
17.7 |
17.6 |
7.3 |
6.8 |
41.1 |
23.0 |
|
7 |
7% |
6.0 |
3.9 |
10.3 |
7.8 |
11.3 |
5.1 |
14.6 |
7.9 |
18.1 |
3.8 |
6.3 |
12.0 |
|
8 |
3% |
4.9 |
2.9 |
1.6 |
3.0 |
2.0 |
3.7 |
13.2 |
5.3 |
10.8 |
1.1 |
25.7 |
3.9 |
|
Statistical data |
χ2=20.84 p<0.001 |
χ2=6.86 p=0.10 |
χ2=33.35 p<0.001 |
χ2=16.24 p=0.001 |
χ2=88.56 p<0.001 |
χ2=42.21 p<0.001 |
|||||||
Note: CI – centile interval; HR – heart rate; sBP – systolic blood pressure; dBP – diastolic blood pressure; 1 – rating according to the 1990 standards; 2 – evaluation according to the 2017 standards.
Asymmetry in distribution of centile rating and revealed features of the morphofunctional indices of modern students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast prove that the region needs its own standards.
During the study we also compared PD standards for students of Nizhny Novgorod (2017) and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019). A number of students participating in examinations for developing standards for Nizhny Novgorod was 2315 people aged 17-30 years, for developing standards for Nizhny Novgorod Oblast – 7180 people aged 17-25 years. Higher number of the examined allowed creating scales for each age group (tables 4-9).
When comparing distribution of BL and BM, we were able to note a greater variability of these indices among students of Nizhny Novgorod (tables 4, 5).
When comparing medians (5CI), we found that young men and women of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast have higher VC, but lower RHD compared to students of Nizhny Novgorod (tables 6, 7).
Comparative analysis of hemodynamic indices demonstrated higher values of sBP and dBP in young men of Nizhny Novgorod (table 8).
Among young women, values of hemodynamic parameters (sBP, dBP and HR) were higher in female students of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (table 9).
Table 4
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of morphological indices of young men of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
BL
|
1 |
17-21 years |
168 |
170 |
175 |
179 |
183 |
186 |
190 |
150-200 |
|
22 and older |
168 |
172 |
176 |
180 |
183 |
186 |
194 |
164-198 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
164 |
167 |
172 |
176 |
179 |
183 |
186 |
160-190 |
|
|
18 years |
164 |
169 |
173 |
177 |
181 |
185 |
188 |
160-193 |
||
|
19 years |
165 |
170 |
175 |
178 |
181 |
185 |
189 |
161-194 |
||
|
20 years |
165 |
170 |
176 |
179 |
183 |
185 |
190 |
159-195 |
||
|
21 and older |
164 |
169 |
175 |
179 |
184 |
186 |
191 |
160-196 |
||
|
BM |
1 |
17-21 years |
54.2 |
59.6 |
64.3 |
70.1 |
76.5 |
85.4 |
95.2 |
45.1-145.0 |
|
22 and older |
58.6 |
63.9 |
70.3 |
76.1 |
84.6 |
97.5 |
105.7 |
56.5-125.2 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
55 |
57 |
60 |
65 |
71 |
78 |
87 |
49-94 |
|
|
18 years |
57 |
59 |
62 |
68 |
73 |
80 |
89 |
50,8-99 |
||
|
19 years |
57 |
59 |
63 |
69 |
75 |
83 |
90 |
52-113 |
||
|
20 years |
58 |
61 |
65 |
70 |
76 |
86 |
91 |
52,7-119 |
||
|
21 and older |
59 |
62 |
66 |
71 |
78 |
90 |
95 |
51,4-123 |
||
|
CG |
1 |
17-21 years |
80 |
88.1 |
91.5 |
93.5 |
98.6 |
105.4 |
114.1 |
75.7-119.5 |
|
22 and older |
80.1 |
86.5 |
90.7 |
95.3 |
102.7 |
114 |
120.8 |
78.2-124.6 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
81 |
83 |
86 |
90 |
95 |
98 |
104 |
71-114 |
|
|
18 years |
82 |
84 |
87 |
91 |
96 |
102 |
105 |
76-113 |
||
|
19 years |
83 |
85 |
88 |
92 |
96 |
103 |
106 |
74-115 |
||
|
20 years |
84 |
87 |
90 |
94 |
97 |
103 |
108 |
75-117 |
||
|
21 and older |
85 |
87 |
90 |
95 |
99 |
105 |
109 |
79-121 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; BL – body length; BM – body mass; CG – chest girth; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Table 5
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of morphological indices of young women of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
BL
|
1 |
17-20 years |
154 |
158 |
161 |
165 |
170 |
174 |
177 |
145-184 |
|
21 years and older |
155 |
158 |
162 |
166 |
170 |
174 |
178 |
139-189 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
154 |
158 |
161 |
165 |
168 |
171 |
174 |
149-179 |
|
|
18 years |
154 |
158 |
162 |
166 |
169 |
173 |
175 |
150-181 |
||
|
19 years |
155 |
158 |
163 |
166 |
171 |
174 |
177 |
151-181 |
||
|
20 years |
156 |
160 |
164 |
166 |
171 |
174 |
178 |
147-184 |
||
|
21 and older |
154 |
159 |
162 |
166 |
171 |
174 |
178 |
151-183 |
||
|
BM |
1 |
17-20 years |
44.6 |
47.2 |
50.7 |
55.4 |
60.9 |
65.5 |
75.2 |
35.4-105.1 |
|
21 years and older |
45.6 |
48.3 |
52.9 |
56.3 |
63.5 |
69.7 |
82.6 |
41.6-106.2 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
46 |
48 |
51 |
54 |
58 |
66 |
72 |
41.5-82.0 |
|
|
18 years |
47 |
49 |
52 |
55 |
61 |
68 |
73 |
41-95.7 |
||
|
19 years |
48 |
50 |
53 |
55 |
63 |
70 |
73 |
40.2-97.7 |
||
|
20 years |
49 |
51 |
54 |
56 |
64 |
70 |
74 |
42-96.7 |
||
|
21 and older |
49 |
52 |
55 |
57 |
65 |
72 |
77 |
43.4-107 |
||
|
CG |
1 |
17-20 years |
77 |
80 |
81 |
84 |
88 |
93 |
97 |
75,0-106,6 |
|
21 years and older |
70.7 |
73.2 |
78.8 |
83.5 |
88.4 |
93.7 |
100.4 |
66.4-124.4 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
73 |
75 |
77 |
80 |
84 |
89 |
92 |
65-102 |
|
|
18 years |
74 |
75 |
78 |
80 |
85 |
90 |
93 |
63-108 |
||
|
19 years |
74 |
75 |
78 |
81 |
86 |
91 |
93 |
64-106 |
||
|
20 years |
75 |
77 |
79 |
83 |
87 |
92 |
95 |
66-104 |
||
|
21 and older |
75 |
77 |
80 |
83 |
88 |
93 |
96 |
68-111 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; BL – body length; BM – body mass; CG – chest girth; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Table 6
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of physiometric indices of young men of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
VC |
1 |
17-21 years |
2.0 |
2.5 |
3.0 |
3.5 |
4.2 |
5.0 |
5.6 |
1.3-6.6 |
|
22 years and older |
2.5 |
3.2 |
3.7 |
4.2 |
4.7 |
5.4 |
6.0 |
1.7-6.4 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
2.0 |
2.4 |
2.8 |
3.6 |
4.3 |
4.8 |
5.0 |
1.8-5.9 |
|
|
18 years |
2.0 |
2.5 |
3.0 |
3.7 |
4.3 |
4.9 |
5.2 |
1.9-6.1 |
||
|
19 years |
2.0 |
2.5 |
3.2 |
3.8 |
4.4 |
5.0 |
5.3 |
2.0-6.6 |
||
|
20 years |
2.2 |
2.5 |
3.2 |
3.9 |
4.5 |
5.3 |
5.6 |
2.0-6.3 |
||
|
21 and older |
2.6 |
2.8 |
3.5 |
4.1 |
4.6 |
5.4 |
5.6 |
1.9-6.9 |
||
|
RHD |
1 |
17-21 years |
30 |
35 |
40 |
45 |
50 |
57 |
60 |
11-80 |
|
22 and older |
37 |
40 |
42 |
50 |
55 |
60 |
64 |
20-75 |
||
RHD |
2 |
17 years |
24 |
30 |
35 |
40 |
42 |
47 |
52 |
13-64 |
|
18 years |
25 |
30 |
36 |
40 |
44 |
49 |
53 |
15-71 |
||
|
19 years |
26 |
30 |
36 |
41 |
45 |
50 |
55 |
18-74 |
||
|
20 years |
27 |
32 |
36 |
43 |
48 |
53 |
57 |
16-75 |
||
|
21 and older |
30 |
33 |
38 |
45 |
52 |
60 |
64 |
17-77 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; VC – vital capacity; RHD – right hand dynamometry; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Table 7
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of physiometric indices of young women of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
VC |
1 |
17-20 years |
1.4 |
1,8 |
2,2 |
2.7 |
3.2 |
3.6 |
4.0 |
0.9-5.0 |
|
21 years and older |
1.9 |
2.2 |
2,6 |
3.0 |
3.3 |
3.7 |
4.2 |
1.0-6.3 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
1.7 |
1.9 |
2,3 |
2.9 |
3.3 |
3.6 |
3.8 |
1.4-5.1 |
|
|
18 years |
1.8 |
2.2 |
2,6 |
3.0 |
3.4 |
3.7 |
4.0 |
1.7-5.6 |
||
|
19 years |
1.9 |
2.2 |
2,6 |
3.1 |
3.4 |
3.8 |
4.1 |
1.6-5.4 |
||
|
20 years |
2.0 |
2.2 |
2,8 |
3.1 |
3.5 |
3.8 |
4.1 |
1.7-5.7 |
||
|
21 and older |
2.0 |
2.2 |
2,8 |
3.1 |
3.5 |
3.8 |
4.1 |
1.5-5.3 |
||
|
RHD |
1 |
17-20 years |
18 |
20 |
21 |
25 |
30 |
32 |
38 |
10-60 |
|
21 years and older |
16 |
20 |
22 |
25 |
30 |
33 |
38 |
10-57 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
13 |
14 |
18 |
22 |
28 |
31 |
34 |
10-53 |
|
|
18 years |
14 |
16 |
20 |
23 |
28 |
33 |
35 |
11-55 |
||
|
19 years |
15 |
18 |
21 |
24 |
28 |
33 |
35 |
12-54 |
||
|
20 years |
16 |
18 |
21 |
25 |
31 |
35 |
37 |
11-52 |
||
|
21 and older |
14 |
17 |
20 |
23 |
30 |
35 |
38 |
10-58 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; VC – vital capacity; RHD – right hand dynamometry; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Table 8
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of hemodynamic indices of young men of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
HR |
1 |
17-21 years |
57 |
63 |
69 |
77 |
82 |
89 |
95 |
48-122 |
|
22 years and older |
58 |
63 |
68 |
73 |
78 |
84 |
92 |
48-108 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
62 |
70 |
75 |
78 |
82 |
88 |
94 |
54-117 |
|
|
18 years |
62 |
67 |
72 |
77 |
81 |
86 |
92 |
52-115 |
||
|
19 years |
60 |
65 |
72 |
75 |
78 |
84 |
91 |
50-114 |
||
|
20 years |
60 |
65 |
70 |
74 |
77 |
84 |
88 |
51-108 |
||
|
21 and older |
60 |
64 |
70 |
73 |
77 |
84 |
88 |
44-112 |
||
|
sBP |
1 |
17-21 years |
101 |
107 |
115 |
122 |
126 |
132 |
139 |
85-148 |
|
22 and older |
103 |
109 |
113 |
121 |
124 |
131 |
138 |
86-150 |
||
|
sBP |
2 |
17 years |
98 |
105 |
110 |
115 |
120 |
127 |
131 |
87-139 |
|
18 years |
100 |
107 |
112 |
117 |
121 |
128 |
133 |
89-145 |
||
|
19 years |
102 |
107 |
114 |
118 |
123 |
128 |
136 |
90-149 |
||
|
20 years |
102 |
110 |
115 |
119 |
125 |
131 |
137 |
91-148 |
||
|
21 and older |
104 |
110 |
115 |
120 |
125 |
134 |
137 |
90-150 |
||
|
dBP |
1 |
17-21 years |
56 |
63 |
74 |
80 |
84 |
87 |
92 |
50-96 |
|
22 and older |
62 |
67 |
72 |
80 |
85 |
89 |
93 |
50-104 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
60 |
63 |
70 |
73 |
75 |
81 |
84 |
50-89 |
|
|
18 years |
61 |
66 |
70 |
74 |
77 |
80 |
85 |
52-96 |
||
|
19 years |
63 |
66 |
70 |
75 |
80 |
84 |
86 |
51-97 |
||
|
20 years |
64 |
69 |
72 |
76 |
80 |
85 |
88 |
53-96 |
||
|
21 and older |
64 |
69 |
72 |
77 |
80 |
85 |
90 |
55-98 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; HR – heart rate; sBP – systolic blood pressure; dBP – diastolic blood pressure; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Table 9
Comparative analysis of univariate centile scales of hemodynamic indices of young women of Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
|
Indices, standards, age |
Centile intervals |
min-max |
||||||||
|
2CI |
3CI |
4CI |
5CI |
6CI |
7CI |
8CI |
||||
|
HR
|
1 |
17-20 years |
58 |
63 |
69 |
77 |
82 |
89 |
96 |
54-116 |
|
21 years and older |
58 |
64 |
69 |
72 |
80 |
85 |
94 |
52-116 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
62 |
68 |
75 |
80 |
84 |
89 |
95 |
55-110 |
|
|
18 years |
61 |
65 |
71 |
79 |
84 |
89 |
92 |
51-121 |
||
|
19 years |
60 |
65 |
70 |
77 |
82 |
88 |
91 |
54-117 |
||
|
20 years |
60 |
65 |
70 |
76 |
82 |
88 |
90 |
52-101 |
||
|
21 and older |
59 |
64 |
70 |
75 |
80 |
88 |
90 |
51-108 |
||
|
sBP
|
1 |
17-20 years |
91 |
98 |
106 |
113 |
118 |
123 |
130 |
80-142 |
|
21 years and older |
93 |
98 |
105 |
112 |
117 |
123 |
129 |
82-145 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
93 |
99 |
103 |
110 |
117 |
122 |
125 |
84-137 |
|
|
18 years |
95 |
100 |
104 |
111 |
118 |
124 |
128 |
83-140 |
||
|
19 years |
96 |
100 |
105 |
112 |
120 |
125 |
130 |
84-141 |
||
|
20 years |
97 |
101 |
107 |
113 |
120 |
125 |
130 |
88-143 |
||
|
21 and older |
98 |
102 |
109 |
114 |
120 |
125 |
130 |
81-145 |
||
|
dBP
|
1 |
17-20 years |
57 |
60 |
66 |
70 |
74 |
80 |
85 |
42-92 |
|
21 years and older |
59 |
64 |
67 |
71 |
78 |
82 |
86 |
50-95 |
||
|
2 |
17 years |
58 |
60 |
66 |
70 |
76 |
80 |
83 |
51-88 |
|
|
18 years |
58 |
61 |
67 |
71 |
76 |
80 |
83 |
51-91 |
||
|
19 years |
59 |
61 |
68 |
72 |
78 |
80 |
84 |
50-94 |
||
|
20 years |
60 |
64 |
69 |
73 |
78 |
80 |
84 |
49-92 |
||
|
21 and older |
60 |
64 |
69 |
74 |
78 |
80 |
84 |
41-94 |
||
Note: CI – centile interval; HR – heart rate; sBP – systolic blood pressure; dBP – diastolic blood pressure; 1 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod (1990); 2 – standards of physical development of students from Nizhny Novgorod Oblast (2019).
Conclusion. Therefore, according to results of the comparative analysis of the 1990 standards, as well as the 2017 and 2019 standards, the following conclusions can be drawn:
- Considering spatial limits of the PD standards and revealed differences, there is a need to use rating tables of various territorial level for students from Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast.
- In order to assess PD, we recommend the centile method that is applied for an analysis of continuous values with distribution of any type, since it takes into account the real boundaries of the series for each characteristic and does not shift the estimation towards underestimation or overestimation of the standard
Higher number of the examined students of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast allowed creating rating scales for each age and gender group, which provided a possibility to gain more informative results while evaluating PD of young men and women.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
- Matveeva N.A., Borodinova A.A., Kvasova A.P., Shulyndina L.V. Physical development of students in Gorky. Lifestyle and Health of Students. Collection of scientific papers of the conference. Gorky: Gorky Medical Institute, 1990. pp. 69-75. (in Russ.)
- Matveeva N.A. Chekalova N.G., Dodonov A.V., Silkin Yu.R., Maksimenko E.O. Physical development of students of higher educational establishments of Nizny Novgorod. Medicinskij alʹmanah, 2015, no. 5(40), pp. 176-178. (in Russ.)
- Mikhajlova S.V., Kuzmichev Yu.G., Zhulin N.V. Methods for assessing and control of the physical health of students: a study guide. Arzamas: Arzamas branch of UNN, 2017. 174 p. (in Russ.)
- Bogomolova E.S., Kuzmichev Yu.G., Matveeva N.A. et al. Methods for studying and evaluating the physical development of children and teens: a textbook. Novgorod: Publishing House of the Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 2018. 92 p. (in Russ.)
- Matveeva N.A. Kuzmichev Yu.G., Safronov V.V. Application of the centile method to assess the state of health of schoolchildren: a study guide. Gorky: B.I., 1983. 50 p. (in Russ.)
- Mikhajlova S.V., Kalyuzhnyj E.A., Sidorova T.V. et al. Study of the physical health of students (on the example of students of the Nizhny Novgorod region): a monograph. Arzamas: Arzamas branch of UNN, 2019. 247 p. (in Russ.)
- Chekalova N.G., Matveeva N.A., Silkin Yu.R., Chekalova S.A., Stolyarova V.V., Gur'yanov M.S., Balchugov V.A., Kurnikova M.V., Bychkov I.A., Dodonov A.V. et al. Physical development and functional reserves of university students. Methods of research and evaluation. Nizhny Novgorod: Publishing house of Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 2017. 68 p. (in Russ.)
- Mikhajlova S.V., Kuzmichev Yu.G., Krylov V.N., Kalyuzhnyj E.A., Krasnikova L.I., Zhulin N.V., Norkina E.I., Glagoleva K.S., Lyubaev A.V. Monitoring of physical development of students from the Novgorod region. Modern scientific researches and innovations, 2016, no. 9 (65), pp. 58-67. (in Russ.)
- Baronenko V.A., Rapoport L.A. Health and physical culture of a student. Moscow: Alfa-M: INFRA-M, 2012. 336 p. (in Russ.)
- Kalyuzhnyj E.A., Mikhajlova S.V., Ibragimova E.E. Morphofunctional adaptation of students, due territorial-ethnic factors. Researches in Science, 2014, no. 2, p. 1. (in Russ.)
INFORMATION ABOUT THE AUTHORS:
Svetlana Vladimirovna Mikhajlova – Candidate of Biological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Physical Culture Department, Arzamas branch of the Lobachevsky University, Arzamas, e-mail:
Tatyana Viktorovna Khrycheva – Physician, Head of the Health Center, Arzamas City Hospital No 1, Arzamas.
Elena Aleksandrovna Boltacheva – Pediatrician, Head of the Children's Health Center, Arzamas Central City Hospital, Arzamas.
Nikolaj Vasil’evich Zhulin – Pediatrician of the Children's Health Center, Arzamas Central City Hospital, Arzamas.
For citation: Mikhajlova S.V., Khrycheva T.V., Boltacheva E.A., Zhulin N.V. Comparative analysis of physical development standards of students in Nizhny Novgorod and Nizhny Novgorod Oblast. Russian Journal of Sports Science: Medicine, Physiology, Training, 2023, vol. 2, no. 4. DOI: 10.24412/2782-6570-2023_02_04_9