Page 127 - Petelin Ana. Ur. 2022. Zdravje otrok in mladostnikov / Health of children and adolescents. Proceedings. Koper: Založba Univerze na Primorskem/University of Primorska Press
P. 127
For the variable FEV1/FEVC (F (1,14) = 4.600; p = 0.019; η2 = 0.335), a sta- the effect of inspiratory muscle training on the maintenance of swimming abilities 127
tistically significant effect of time with a large effect size was shown (Figure 3).
The score decreased in the intervention (–1.8%, p = 0.255) and control group
(–11.9%, p = 0.174). The intervention group showed less deterioration than the
control group.
Figure 3: Graphic representation of the box with whiskers for the values
of the variable ratio between FEV1 in FEVC
The results of Buteyko control pause test shows statistically significant dif-
ferences in the effect of time (F (1,13) = 4.667; p = 0.000; η2 = 0.661) and time
and group (F (1,13) = 4.667; p = 0.044; η2 = 0.278) with a large effect size (Fig-
ure 4). The result increased significantly in the intervention group (52.3%, p =
0.001) and insignificantly in the control group (111.3%, p = 0.052). Based on the
results, we can conclude that the control group was better and the intervention
had a negative effect on this variable.
Figure 4: Graphic representation of the box with whiskers for the values
of the variable Buteyko test (s)
The results of the test of CO₂ tolerance (hereafter TTCO₂) parameter
show statistically significant differences in the effect of time (F (1,14) = 4.600;
p = 0.005; η2 = 0.441) with a large effect size (Figure 5). The TTCO₂ score sig-
tistically significant effect of time with a large effect size was shown (Figure 3).
The score decreased in the intervention (–1.8%, p = 0.255) and control group
(–11.9%, p = 0.174). The intervention group showed less deterioration than the
control group.
Figure 3: Graphic representation of the box with whiskers for the values
of the variable ratio between FEV1 in FEVC
The results of Buteyko control pause test shows statistically significant dif-
ferences in the effect of time (F (1,13) = 4.667; p = 0.000; η2 = 0.661) and time
and group (F (1,13) = 4.667; p = 0.044; η2 = 0.278) with a large effect size (Fig-
ure 4). The result increased significantly in the intervention group (52.3%, p =
0.001) and insignificantly in the control group (111.3%, p = 0.052). Based on the
results, we can conclude that the control group was better and the intervention
had a negative effect on this variable.
Figure 4: Graphic representation of the box with whiskers for the values
of the variable Buteyko test (s)
The results of the test of CO₂ tolerance (hereafter TTCO₂) parameter
show statistically significant differences in the effect of time (F (1,14) = 4.600;
p = 0.005; η2 = 0.441) with a large effect size (Figure 5). The TTCO₂ score sig-
