ArticleCureus2026
Effect of Trunk Rotation and Sex Differences on Lung Volume and Respiratory Muscle Strength in Healthy Young People.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Posture and trunk movements influence respiratory mechanics by altering rib cage mobility and thoracoabdominal motion. Trunk rotation frequently occurs during activities of daily living and may affect lung volumes and respiratory muscle function. Anatomical and physiological differences between males and females may also influence respiratory responses to posture. However, the combined effects of trunk rotation and biological sex on pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of trunk rotation and sex differences on lung volume parameters and respiratory muscle strength in healthy young adults. Methodology A total of 20 healthy young adults (9 males and 11 females; mean age = 22 ± 1 years) participated in this study. Participants performed pulmonary function tests in the sitting position at the resting posture or in the sitting position with 30° trunk rotation. Lung function parameters, including vital capacity (VC), inspiratory capacity (IC), tidal volume (VT), expiratory reserve volume (ERV), inspiratory reserve volume (IRV), forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1.0), were measured using spirometry. Respiratory muscle strength was assessed using maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax) and maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax). Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the effects of posture and sex. Results Significant main effects of sex were observed for several respiratory variables, including FVC, FEV1.0, VC, ERV, PImax, and PEmax, with males showing higher values than females. Significant main effects of posture were also observed for FVC, FEV1.0, VC, ERV, PImax, and PEmax, with lower values in the rotational posture than in the resting posture. A significant interaction between posture and sex was found for PEmax, with a greater decrease in males during trunk rotation. In contrast, PImax decreased significantly in the rotational posture only in females. Conclusions Trunk rotation in the sitting position reduces several lung volume parameters and respiratory muscle strength in healthy young adults, and the effects may differ between males and females. In particular, trunk rotation may affect forced expiration more in males and inspiratory muscle strength more in females. These findings provide fundamental data on the interaction between posture and sex in respiratory mechanics and may provide useful insights for respiratory assessment and rehabilitation strategies involving trunk movement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.