European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine

Yoga, an ancient Indian discipline that integrates physical postures, regulated breathing, and mental focus, has gained global scientific recognition for its impact on various physiological systems, including the cardiopulmonary axis. Respiratory parameters are particularly influenced by practices such as pranayama, asanas involving thoraco-abdominal coordination, and meditative techniques that regulate autonomic balance. Respiration is not only a mechanical process but also a dynamic reflection of neural, muscular, and psychological functioning. Contemporary research indicates that respiratory efficiency can be markedly enhanced through systematic yoga practices, which improve lung volumes, strengthen respiratory musculature, optimize gas exchange, and shift autonomic functioning toward parasympathetic predominance. In contrast, sedentary lifestyles-characterized by prolonged sitting, minimal physical activity, and limited engagement of respiratory muscles-are associated with reduced pulmonary capacity, decreased chest wall compliance, and impaired ventilatory efficiency.[1][2]

Several physiological mechanisms explain the improved respiratory performance in yoga practitioners. Slow, deep breathing techniques increase tidal volume and vital capacity by augmenting diaphragmatic excursion and expanding alveolar recruitment. Regular pranayama has been shown to reduce airway resistance, enhance bronchial tone stability, and improve pulmonary stretch-receptor responsiveness. Additionally, yoga’s calming influence on the autonomic nervous system can modulate respiratory rate and rhythm, contributing to better ventilatory control. Sedentary individuals, however, often experience shallow breathing patterns predominantly utilizing upper chest muscles, which may lead to reduced forced expiratory flow rates and suboptimal oxygenation during physical exertion.[3]

Emerging evidence supports that yoga practitioners demonstrate superior values of spirometric variables such as Forced Vital Capacity (FVC), Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV₁), Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR), and Maximum Voluntary Ventilation (MVV) when compared to their sedentary counterparts. The comparison of respiratory parameters between these groups provides valuable insights into the extent to which lifestyle choices influence pulmonary health. Such information is particularly relevant in the modern era, where physical inactivity is prevalent due to technological dependence and occupational constraints.[4]

Aim

To compare respiratory parameters between yoga practitioners and sedentary individuals.

Objectives

1. To assess key respiratory parameters among yoga practitioners.
2. To evaluate respiratory parameters among sedentary individuals.
3. To compare and analyze differences in pulmonary function between the two groups.

Source of Data

Data were obtained from adult participants attending yoga centers as well as sedentary individuals from the general community who met the study criteria.

Study Design

A cross-sectional comparative study.

Study Location

The study was conducted in the Department of Physiology in collaboration with certified yoga training centers and community health screening camps.

Study Duration

The study was carried out over a period of 12 months.

Sample Size

A total of 200 participants were enrolled, consisting of 100 yoga practitioners and 100 sedentary individuals.

Inclusion Criteria

• Adults aged 18-60 years.
• Yoga practitioners with ≥6 months of consistent yoga practice (minimum 5 days per week, 45 minutes/day).
• Sedentary individuals with no engagement in structured physical activity for the past 6 months.
• Participants willing to provide written informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria

• History of chronic respiratory diseases (e.g., asthma, COPD, bronchitis).
• Active smokers or those with a smoking history in the past 5 years.
• Known cardiovascular, neuromuscular, or systemic illnesses affecting lung function.
• Recent respiratory infection within the last 4 weeks.
• Pregnant women.

Procedure and Methodology

Eligible participants were recruited after screening based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. A detailed history and physical examination were conducted. Anthropometric measurements including height, weight, and BMI were recorded. Respiratory parameters were assessed using a standardized digital spirometer. Participants were instructed on the correct technique for performing spirometry as per ATS/ERS guidelines. Each parameter-FVC, FEV₁, FEV₁/FVC ratio, PEFR, and MVV-was measured thrice, and the best value was considered for analysis. Yoga practitioners were assessed at least 2 hours after their routine session to avoid acute exercise effects.

Sample Processing

Spirometric data were recorded digitally, verified for technical acceptability, and stored in the study database. Calibration of the spirometer was performed daily before measurement sessions.

Statistical Methods

Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Continuous variables were expressed as Mean ± SD and compared using the unpaired t-test. Categorical variables were analyzed with the chi-square test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Effect size was also calculated to quantify the magnitude of differences.

Data Collection

Data were collected through pre-structured proformas, direct spirometry testing, and physical examination records. All participant information was coded to maintain confidentiality and stored securely throughout the study.

Table 1: Baseline Comparison Between Yoga Practitioners and Sedentary Individuals (N=200)

Table 1 presents the comparative analysis of baseline and respiratory parameters between yoga practitioners and sedentary individuals. The two groups were comparable in age, with mean ages of 34.7 ± 8.9 years and 36.3 ± 9.1 years respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.221). The gender distribution was also similar, with males constituting 58% of the yoga group and 61% of the sedentary group (p = 0.672), indicating that demographic characteristics were balanced. BMI, however, was significantly lower in yoga practitioners (23.4 ± 2.7 kg/m²) compared to sedentary individuals (24.8 ± 3.0 kg/m²), with a meaningful difference confirmed by the confidence interval (-2.25 to -0.53) and a highly significant p-value (0.001).

Regarding respiratory parameters, yoga practitioners demonstrated markedly better pulmonary function. The mean FVC was significantly higher in the yoga group (3.61 ± 0.42 L) compared to the sedentary group (3.22 ± 0.39 L) (p < 0.001). Similarly, FEV₁ showed a statistically significant advantage among yoga practitioners (2.98 ± 0.37 L vs. 2.63 ± 0.34 L; p < 0.001). Although the FEV₁/FVC ratio was slightly higher in the yoga group (82.6 ± 4.8%) than in the sedentary group (81.7 ± 5.2%), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.202). Yoga practitioners also exhibited substantially greater PEFR (463.8 ± 64.1 L/min vs. 421.7 ± 59.4 L/min; p < 0.001) and MVV (114.9 ± 13.8 L/min vs. 103.6 ± 12.7 L/min; p < 0.001), highlighting enhanced respiratory muscle strength and ventilatory capacity among regular yoga practitioners.

Table 2: Key Respiratory Parameters Among Yoga Practitioners (n=100)

Table 2 describes the respiratory performance specifically within the yoga practitioner group and compares their mean values with established normal reference standards. Yoga practitioners demonstrated high values of FVC (3.61 ± 0.42 L) and FEV₁ (2.98 ± 0.37 L), both significantly exceeding normal reference ranges, with strong statistical significance (p < 0.001 for both). The FEV₁/FVC ratio averaged 82.6 ± 4.8%, which was also significantly higher than the reference (p < 0.001), demonstrating preserved airway integrity and effective exhalatory flow.

PEFR and MVV were notably elevated as well, with yoga participants recording PEFR values of 463.8 ± 64.1 L/min and MVV values of 114.9 ± 13.8 L/min, both showing strong significance against reference standards (p < 0.001). These values reflect superior peak flow rates and ventilatory endurance, likely attributed to enhanced respiratory muscle conditioning through pranayama, deep breathing exercises, and consistent physical training inherent in yoga practice.

In terms of spirometric categories, an overwhelming majority (94%) of yoga practitioners exhibited a normal spirometry pattern, while only 6% demonstrated mild restrictive changes. The chi-square test (χ² = 66.1, p < 0.001) confirms a statistically robust predominance of normal respiratory function in this group.

Table 3: Respiratory Parameters among Sedentary Individuals (n=100)

Table 3 outlines the respiratory performance among sedentary individuals. The FVC (3.22 ± 0.39 L) and FEV₁ (2.63 ± 0.34 L) values were significantly below normal reference levels, as indicated by the highly significant negative t-values and narrow confidence intervals (p < 0.001 for both), suggesting compromised lung volume and expiratory flow. The FEV₁/FVC ratio (81.7 ± 5.2%) did not significantly differ from normal references (p = 0.309), implying that airway obstruction was not a predominant issue, but rather mild restrictive patterns were more common.

PEFR and MVV values were also significantly reduced (421.7 ± 59.4 L/min and 103.6 ± 12.7 L/min respectively), with both parameters showing strong statistical significance (p < 0.001). These findings point to diminished respiratory muscle strength and lower ventilatory capacity among sedentary individuals.

Pattern analysis revealed that only 79% of sedentary participants had a normal spirometry pattern, while 21% demonstrated mild restriction. The chi-square test (χ² = 16.8, p < 0.001) confirms that restrictive impairments were significantly more prevalent in sedentary individuals.

Table 4: Comparison of Pulmonary Function Between Yoga Practitioners and Sedentary Individuals

Table 4 provides a direct comparison of pulmonary function between yoga practitioners and sedentary individuals. Across all major respiratory parameters, yoga practitioners demonstrated significantly better spirometric outcomes. FVC and FEV₁ were both markedly higher in the yoga group, with mean differences demonstrating strong statistical significance (p < 0.001). PEFR and MVV also exhibited substantially higher values among yoga practitioners, indicating greater peak expiratory flow and superior ventilatory capacity (p < 0.001 for both). These results highlight the beneficial impact of yoga on both respiratory muscle activity and overall pulmonary performance.

The FEV₁/FVC ratio did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.202), suggesting that yoga primarily improves lung volumes and flow rates rather than altering the relative proportion of expiratory capacity. The analysis of spirometric patterns revealed that 94% of yoga practitioners had normal spirometry compared to 79% in the sedentary group, and this difference was statistically significant (χ² = 8.83, p = 0.003). Mild restrictive patterns were present in only 6% of the yoga group but in 21% of sedentary individuals, further reinforcing the protective role of yoga in maintaining healthy pulmonary function

In Table 1, yoga practitioners were found to have significantly lower BMI (23.4 ± 2.7 kg/m²) than sedentary individuals (24.8 ± 3.0 kg/m²; p = 0.001). This corresponds with observations made by Goswami K et al. (2024)[5], who reported lower adiposity and enhanced pulmonary function among long-term yoga practitioners due to improved metabolic efficiency and regular physical activity. Similarly, Gohel MK et al. (2021)[6] found that consistent engagement in yoga leads to reductions in body fat percentage and enhanced respiratory muscle performance.

The significantly higher FVC and FEV₁ values observed in yoga practitioners (3.61 ± 0.42 L and 2.98 ± 0.37 L) compared to sedentary individuals (3.22 ± 0.39 L and 2.63 ± 0.34 L, respectively) mirror findings by Mitra S et al. (2024)[7], who documented substantial improvements in lung volumes after regular pranayama practice. Likewise, Chauntry AJ et al. (2023)[8] reported that yoga enhances diaphragmatic strength, chest wall expansion, and alveolar recruitment, contributing to better expiratory performance. The present study also observed significantly greater PEFR and MVV values among yoga practitioners (p < 0.001), which is consistent with the work of Pawar R. (2021)[9], who reported that yoga improves peak flow rates through strengthened respiratory musculature and improved thoraco-abdominal coordination.

Table 2 highlights the internal performance profile of yoga practitioners, showing that 94% had normal spirometry patterns with only 6% exhibiting mild restriction. This is in line with findings by Goswami K et al. (2024)[5], who demonstrated that yoga practitioners have significantly fewer restrictive abnormalities compared to non-practitioners. The elevated MVV (114.9 ± 13.8 L/min) and PEFR (463.8 ± 64.1 L/min) support previous observations by Mitra S et al. (2024)[7], who concluded that yoga enhances ventilatory endurance and respiratory muscle strength due to slow-breathing exercises and postural training.

Table 3, depicting respiratory profiles of sedentary individuals, reveals reduced FVC, FEV₁, PEFR, and MVV values, with 21% demonstrating mild restrictive patterns. These findings align with the work by Chahal P et al. (2023)[10], who reported that sedentary individuals often develop shallow breathing patterns, decreased lung compliance, and weaker respiratory musculature due to inactivity. The absence of significant difference in FEV₁/FVC ratio in the sedentary group corresponds with typical mild restrictive physiology rather than obstructive pathology.

Table 4 clearly illustrates the superiority of yoga practitioners across all major respiratory parameters except the FEV₁/FVC ratio. The significant improvements across FVC, FEV₁, PEFR, and MVV reflect enhanced respiratory efficiency attributable to yoga practices such as pranayama, asanas involving thoracic mobility, and improved autonomic regulation. These results strengthen the conclusions drawn by Manna I. (2021)[11] & Shilpa N et al. (2020)[12], both of whom emphasized the beneficial effects of yoga on ventilatory mechanics. The significantly higher proportion of normal spirometry patterns among yoga practitioners (94% vs. 79%, p = 0.003) further supports yoga’s protective effect against restrictive lung patterns, corroborating findings by Michał TB et al. (2020)[13] & Bhagel P et al. (2021)[14].

The present comparative study clearly demonstrates that regular yoga practice has a significant positive impact on respiratory health. Yoga practitioners exhibited higher values of FVC, FEV₁, PEFR, and MVV compared to sedentary individuals, indicating better lung volumes, improved expiratory flow rates, and enhanced ventilatory endurance. The predominance of normal spirometry patterns in the yoga group and the higher prevalence of mild restrictive defects in sedentary participants further highlight the protective role of yoga against respiratory functional decline. Although the FEV₁/FVC ratio did not differ significantly between the groups, the overall spirometric improvements strongly suggest that yoga enhances respiratory muscle strength, expands thoracic mobility, and promotes efficient breathing mechanics. These findings reinforce yoga’s utility as a low-cost, accessible, and effective method for improving pulmonary function and countering the adverse respiratory effects associated with sedentary lifestyles.

1.       Fetter C, Souza LA, Dartora DR, Schein A, Eibel B, Casali K, Irigoyen MC. Increased Maximal Expiratory Pressure, Abdominal and Thoracic Respiratory Expansibility in Healthy Yoga Practitioners Compared to Healthy Sedentary Individuals. International Journal of Cardiovascular Sciences. 2021 Jul 7;34:728-31.

2.       Lin JR, Wu PT, Wu WL, Chang YK, Chu IH. The psychophysiological profile and cardiac autonomic reactivity in long-term female yoga practitioners: A comparison with runners and sedentary individuals. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2022 Jun 23;19(13):7671.

3.       Rahman F, Sarker S, Zohura FT, Mahmuda S, Hoque MM, Akter A. Comparison of Peak Expiratory Flow Rate and BMI Between Yogic and Sedentary Population in Rajshahi City. TAJ: Journal of Teachers Association. 2024 Jun 30;37(1):155-60.

4.       Karunarathne LU, Amarasiri WA, Fernando AD. Respiratory function in healthy long-term meditators: A cross-sectional comparative study. Heliyon. 2023 Aug 1;9(8).

5.       Goswami K, Sao AK. Effects of Yoga Practice on Cardiovascular & Respiratory Parametersin Professional Athletes. Indian Journal of YOGA Exercise & Sport Science and Physical Education. 2024 Dec 30:35-40.

6.       Gohel MK, Phatak AG, Kharod UN, Pandya BA, Prajapati BL, Shah UM. Effect of long-term regular yoga on physical health of yoga practitioners. Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 2021 Jul 1;46(3):508-10.

7.       Mitra S, Mitra M, Nandi P, Saha M, Nandi DK. Yogistic efficacy on cardiopulmonary capacities, endurance efficiencies and musculoskeletal potentialities in female college students. Work. 2024 Aug 6;78(4):1201-12.

8.       Chauntry AJ, Bishop NC, Hamer M, Paine NJ. Sedentary behaviour, but not moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, is associated with respiratory responses to acute psychological stress. Biological Psychology. 2023 Jan 27.

9.       Pawar R. A Study On Breathing Exercises And Lung Functions Of Sedentary Women. JK Practitioner. 2021 Apr 1;26(2).

10.    Chahal P, Tyagi P. Effectiveness of yogic exercise on respiratory health indices: A systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies. Sports Science & Health Advances. 2023 Dec 30;1(2):57-72.

11.    Manna I. Influence of Yoga Practice on Body Composition and Cardio-Respiratory Functions of Adolescent Male. InInternational Conference of the Indian Society of Ergonomics 2021 Dec 8 (pp. 1059-1068).

12.    Shilpa N, Veena HC. Effect of yoga on peak expiratory flow rate. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2020;10(5):431-3.

13.    Michał TB, Tomasz WB, Wojcik Z, Gajewski J, Laskin JJ. The effects of a 6-month moderate-intensity Hatha yoga-based training program on health-related fitness in middle-aged sedentary women: A randomized controlled study. The Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 2020 Aug;60(8):1148-58.

14.    Bhagel P, Saha M. Effects of yogic intervention on pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength parameters: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Journal of Biosciences. 2021 Sep;46(3):76.