Lung function was collected over five years from two different undergraduate practical classes. We wished to investigate data reproducibility over this time period in both classes. We were unable to find any published data related to this. This study aims to analyse anonymised lung function data already collected during scheduled teaching sessions over the past five years. The goal is to identify trends and variability in student lung function data and explore potential educational insights.

Data was collected from 320 students as part of their respiratory physiology practical class. Students were informed that data would be used for educational purposes and gave their informed consent. Ethical approval was given by the University of Plymouth Faculty of Science and Engineering Research Ethics and Integrity Committee. No identifiable information was collected. Data collected was breathing rates at rest and after breath holding, peak expiratory flow (PEF), respiratory rate, tidal volume, ventilation rate and spirometric volumes. Data on ambient temperature, humidity and particulate matter was collected retrospectively using government databases. Means (SD), Levene’s test of variance and one way ANOVA were used for analysis. P values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Tests for variance showed a significant difference (P<0.05) for the breathing rate collected after a one-minute breath hold (n=213). One way ANOVA testing for mean differences showed significant differences (P<0.05) in PEF (n=270), tidal volume and forced vital capacity (n=49). Regression data on physiological and environment data will also be presented.

Our findings showed that most lung function variables in different cohorts were relatively reproducible over this five-year period. Some variables did show differences, however this most likely was due to a low number of students in that particular year. Various factors can affect reproducibility, including facilitator and student engagement, cohort size, and limitation of resources. Our message to students and staff is that we should be reassured that lung function data students collect is reliable and reproducible.