Billie Giles-Corti1, Robert J Donovan. 1. School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia. billie@cyllene.uwa.edu.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spatial access to recreational facilities and perceptions of the neighborhood environment and physical activity levels were examined by the socioeconomic status of area of residence (SES). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adults (18-59 years) (n = 1,803) stratified by SES using a geographic-based index was conducted. RESULTS: Respondents in low SES areas had superior spatial access to many recreational facilities, but were less likely to use them compared with those living in high SES areas. They were more likely to perceive that they had access to sidewalks and shops, but also perceived that their neighborhood was busier with traffic, less attractive, and less supportive of walking. After adjustment, respondents living in low SES areas were 36% less likely to undertake vigorous activity. While they were more likely to walk for transport, this was not statistically significant (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.98-1.64), nor were other SES differences in walking for recreation and walking as recommended. Modifiable environmental factors were associated with walking and vigorous activity, especially perceived access to sidewalks and neighborhood attractiveness. Spatial access to attractive, public open space was associated with walking. CONCLUSIONS: Creating supportive environments--particularly sidewalks in attractive neighborhoods--has the potential to increase walking and vigorous activity.
BACKGROUND: Spatial access to recreational facilities and perceptions of the neighborhood environment and physical activity levels were examined by the socioeconomic status of area of residence (SES). METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adults (18-59 years) (n = 1,803) stratified by SES using a geographic-based index was conducted. RESULTS: Respondents in low SES areas had superior spatial access to many recreational facilities, but were less likely to use them compared with those living in high SES areas. They were more likely to perceive that they had access to sidewalks and shops, but also perceived that their neighborhood was busier with traffic, less attractive, and less supportive of walking. After adjustment, respondents living in low SES areas were 36% less likely to undertake vigorous activity. While they were more likely to walk for transport, this was not statistically significant (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.98-1.64), nor were other SES differences in walking for recreation and walking as recommended. Modifiable environmental factors were associated with walking and vigorous activity, especially perceived access to sidewalks and neighborhood attractiveness. Spatial access to attractive, public open space was associated with walking. CONCLUSIONS: Creating supportive environments--particularly sidewalks in attractive neighborhoods--has the potential to increase walking and vigorous activity.
Authors: Chris Blanchard; Daniel Rainham; Jill McSweeney; John Spence; Lisa McDonnell; Ryan Rhodes; Robert Reid; Kerry McGannon; Nancy Edwards Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: James J Burns; Sarah Goff; Greg Karamian; Coleen Walsh; Lela Hobby; Jane Garb Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2011 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Amélia Augusta de Lima Friche; Ana V Diez-Roux; Cibele Comini César; César Coelho Xavier; Fernando Augusto Proietti; Waleska Teixeira Caiaffa Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Andrea S Mendoza-Vasconez; Sarah Linke; Mario Muñoz; Dori Pekmezi; Cole Ainsworth; Mayra Cano; Victoria Williams; Bess H Marcus; Britta A Larsen Journal: Curr Sports Med Rep Date: 2016 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.733