Table 4.
Effect of yogic practice on cardio metabolic risk factors of different age groups
| Parameters | 20–29 years (A) | 30–39 years (B) | 40–50 years (C) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | Before | After | Before | After | |
| HF (nu) | 58.7 ± 3.29 | 84.2 ± 6.56** | 47.5 ± 3.12 | 57.2 ± 3.58 | 38.9 ± 2.78¥¥¥ | 55.9 ± 3.27*** |
| LF (nu) | 41.5 ± 3.29 | 25.5 ± 1.59*** | 51.4 ± 3.57 | 38.6 ± 2.73** | 56.7 ± 3.69¥¥ | 41.7 ± 2.95** |
| LF/HF | 0.7 ± 0.15 | 0.3 ± 0.03 | 1.1 ± 0.32 | 0.7 ± 0.08 | 1.5 ± 0.23¥ | 0.7 ± 0.17* |
| Total power (ms2) | 4,371.9 ± 459.4 | 6,208.7 ± 325.0** | 3,548.4 ± 422.3** | 5,152.2 ± 422.4 | 2,421.2 ± 257.4¥¥ | 3,590.8 ± 311.4** |
| Mean RR (ms) | 984.9 ± 23.38 | 1,322.1 ± 95.07*** | 903.2 ± 33.0 | 1,209.2 ± 87.8** | 897.0 ± 27.53 | 1,171.2 ± 95.4* |
| SDNN (ms) | 84.2 ± 7.18 | 120.7 ± 10.59** | 72.4 ± 7.33 | 107.5 ± 8.42** | 54.9 ± 5.17 | 88.1 ± 7.68** |
| RMSSD (ms) | 111.0 ± 20.52 | 146.6 ± 34.91 | 61.1 ± 7.22 | 79.6 ± 7.38* | 36.4 ± 4.52 | 52.7 ± 5.63* |
| pNN50 (%) | 36.2 ± 4.69 | 56.8 ± 2.98*** | 31.9 ± 4.08 | 44.0 ± 3.18** | 22.9 ± 4.15 | 40.8 ± 3.66* |
| SC (US) | 0.4 ± 0.03 | 0.74 ± 0.01** | 0.35 ± 0.03 | 0.71 ± 0.09** | 0.27 ± 0.02 | 0.64 ± 0.08*** |
Values are expressed as mean±SEM
HF (nu) high-frequency power (numeric unit), LF (nu) low-frequency power (numeric unit), LF/HF ratio of low to high frequency, SDNN standard deviation of all NN interval, RMSSD square root of the mean of the sum of the squares of different between adjustment NN interval, pNN50 percent difference between adjuscent NN intervals that are greater than 50 ms, SC skin conductance
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; and ***p < 0.001; comparisons were made between initial baseline values and the values obtained after yogic practice using paired “t” test. ¥ p < 0.05; ¥¥ p < 0.01; and ¥¥¥ p < 0.001, as compared to pre exposure values of group A; one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey–Kramer’s multiple comparison post hoc test were used to find out the difference between different age groups