Quantitative Evaluation of Economic Level Effects on Physical Fitness Condition among Elderly Population in Hebei Province of China

Li Yuan; Chai Jianzhong; Liu Lijuan; Ji Xiaofeng; Zhang Yan; Yang Xiangang

doi:10.5334/paah.6

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Sample size of The National Physical Fitness Surveillance in Hebei province in 2104.

Gender	CC	HL	FL	Total
Male	145	727	740	1612
Female	142	756	771	1669
Total	287	1483	1511	3281

Table 2

Overall physical function (Average ± SD) and QD at body level of male participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
Height (cm)	165.38 ± 5.39	168.39 ± 5.70	167.89 ± 5.35	0.037478	NS	0.031299	NS	0.0061789	NS
Weight (kg)	69.77 ± 10.05	71.22 ± 9.62	71.85 ± 9.23	0.04274	NS	0.06104	NS	0.01830	NS
BMI	25.46 ± 3.08	25.09 ± 2.97	25.48 ± 2.96	0.03042	NS	0.001632	NS	0.03205	NS
SR	3.24 ± 8.95	3.22 ± 8.95	2.84 ± 8.17	0.0129	NS	0.274	⋆	0.261	NS
GS	36.99 ± 5.73	35.07 ± 7.96	35.56 ± 7.27	0.1108	NS	0.08192	NS	0.02883	NS
SSEC	7.19 ± 10.98	9.59 ± 8.44	7.51 ± 6.37	0.598	⋆⋆	0.0905	NS	0.508	⋆⋆

[i] Note: QD: (0.27, 0.47). QD < 0.27 indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.27 ≤ QD < 0.47 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 0.47 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.

Table 3

Overall physical function (Average ± SD) and QD at body level of female participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
Height (cm)	153.70 ± 4.49	157.06 ± 5.23	156.87 ± 5.30	0.044934	NS	0.042419	NS	0.0025152	NS
Weight (kg)	62.23 ± 8.73	63.36 ± 8.25	62.97 ± 7.81	0.03739	NS	0.02456	NS	0.01283	NS
BMI	26.33 ± 3.40	25.69 ± 3.15	25.60 ± 3.08	0.05113	NS	0.05842	NS	0.007292	NS
SR	8.52 ± 7.71	8.60 ± 8.35	7.86 ± 7.34	0.0194	NS	0.168	NS	0.187	NS
GS	22.99 ± 3.12	22.39 ± 5.27	21.79 ± 5.76	0.05495	NS	0.1114	NS	0.05644	NS
SSEC	5.18 ± 4.53	6.95±5.90	6.34±5.38	0.611	⋆⋆	0.420	⋆	0.191	NS

[i] Note: QD: (0.27, 0.47). QD < 0.27 indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.27 ≤ QD < 0.47 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 0.47 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.

Table 4

Organic function (Average ± SD) and QD at organic tissues level of male participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
Chest CIR (cm)	95.14 ± 5.27	95.90 ± 6.92	95.76 ± 6.45	0.01653	NS	0.0135	NS	0.003036	NS
Waist CIR (cm)	91.07 ± 8.36	91.11 ± 9.43	91.59 ± 8.87	0.0009124	NS	0.01183	NS	0.01092	NS
Hip CIR (cm)	98.88 ± 5.57	99.05 ± 7.00	98.82 ± 6.48	0.003569	NS	0.001261	NS	0.004831	NS
STUA (mm)	12.11 ± 4.96	14.14 ± 6.30	13.42 ± 6.25	0.322	NS	0.2134	NS	0.1086	NS
STSC (mm)	17.82 ± 6.67	19.70 ± 7.90	19.16 ± 7.15	0.2084	NS	0.1507	NS	0.05775	NS
STAB (mm)	24.09 ± 8.75	24.50 ± 9.72	22.40 ± 8.03	0.03507	NS	0.1511	NS	0.1862	NS
HR (times/min)	79.13 ± 10.71	75.54 ± 9.50	75.70 ± 9.37	0.09647	NS	0.09208	NS	0.004396	NS
SP (mmHg)	130.52 ± 14.64	134.47 ± 16.40	132.27 ± 14.74	0.06195	NS	0.027674	NS	0.034276	NS
DP (mmHg)	82.57 ± 10.20	79.91 ± 10.74	83.21 ± 9.77	0.06804	NS	0.01604	NS	0.08408	NS
VC (ml)	2407.60 ± 653.92	2627.50 ± 695.86	2406.34 ± 681.49	0.181609	NS	0.00108771	NS	0.182697	NS

[i] Note: QD: (0.47, 0.80). QD < 0.47indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.47 ≤ QD <0.80 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 0.80 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.

Table 5

Organic function (Average ± SD) and QD at organic tissues level of female participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
Chest CIR (cm)	91.63 ± 6.75	94.64 ± 7.65	94.20 ± 7.20	0.06716	NS	0.05748	NS	0.009683	NS
Waist CIR (cm)	90.70 ± 9.33	89.16 ± 9.66	88.56 ± 8.79	0.03558	NS	0.04961	NS	0.01403	NS
Hip CIR (cm)	99.23 ± 6.19	99.09 ± 6.78	99.05 ± 6.72	0.002934	NS	0.003773	NS	0.0008389	NS
STUA (mm)	22.46 ± 6.79	20.25 ± 6.98	18.28 ± 6.10	0.2152	NS	0.4279	NS	0.2127	NS
STSC (mm)	22.12 ± 7.24	21.79 ± 8.16	20.37 ± 6.71	0.03123	NS	0.1712	NS	0.1400	NS
STAB (mm)	29.73 ± 8.87	27.85 ± 9.80	25.75 ± 8.33	0.1357	NS	0.2986	NS	0.1629	NS
HR (times/min)	78.61 ± 9.68	76.38 ± 9.31	76.08 ± 9.10	0.05980	NS	0.06797	NS	0.008177	NS
SP (mmHg)	125.01 ± 15.90	131.74 ± 17.34	131.84 ± 15.92	0.10896	NS	0.110532	NS	0.0015766	NS
DP (mmHg)	77.49 ± 9.93	77.35 ± 10.53	80.67 ± 9.69	0.003757	NS	0.08357	NS	0.08732	NS
VC (ml)	1507.94 ± 439.18	1967.01 ± 531.97	1617.97 ± 589.60	0.552230	⋆	0.146338	NS	0.405892	NS

[i] Note: QD: (0.47, 0.80). QD < 0.47indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.47 ≤ QD < 0.80 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 0.80 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.

Table 6

Phycology-neuro function (Average ± SD) and QD at cellular/molecular level of male participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
CFT (s)	0.76 ± 0.23	0.69 ± 0.24	0.70 ± 0.23	0.20	NS	0.17	NS	0.030	NS

[i] Note: QD: (0.80, 1.22). QD < 0.80 indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.80 ≤ QD < 1.22 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 1.22 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.

Table 7

Phycology-neuro function (Average ± SD) and QD at cellular/molecular level of female participants.

	CC	HL	GL	CC vs HL		CC vs GL		HL vs GL
CFT (s)	0.82 ± 0.25	0.73 ± 0.25	0.76 ± 0.27	0.24	NS	0.16	NS	0.084	NS

[i] Note: QD: (0.80, 1.22). QD < 0.80 indicates no difference representing with NS; 0.80 ≤ QD < 1.22 indicates significant difference representing with ⋆; QD ≥ 1.22 indicates very significant difference representing with ⋆⋆.