Allyson Calder1, Gisela Sole2, Hilda Mulligan3. 1. Centre for Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research (CHARR), School of Physiotherapy Christchurch, University of Otago, PO Box 4345, Christchurch Mail Centre 8140, New Zealand. Electronic address: ally.calder@otago.ac.nz. 2. Centre for Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research (CHARR), School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand. Electronic address: gisela.sole@otago.ac.nz. 3. Centre for Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research (CHARR), School of Physiotherapy Christchurch, University of Otago, PO Box 4345, Christchurch Mail Centre 8140, New Zealand. Electronic address: hilda.mulligan@otago.ac.nz.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fitness centers could be ideal places for people with disabilities to engage in the recommended levels of physical activity for healthy well-being. However, one of the primary barriers to participation at fitness centers is an inaccessible built environment. OBJECTIVE: This review study aimed to evaluate the accessibility of public indoor fitness centers for people with disabilities. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and web based search engines using keywords and synonyms for fitness centers, people with disability and accessibility. Observational studies that used standardized measures to evaluate fitness centers were included and critically appraised using a modified version of the checklist for randomized and non-randomized studies developed by Downs and Black. We analyzed the data descriptively. This systematic review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (ID:CRD42016043945). RESULTS: A total of 533 fitness centers were evaluated for accessibility across 14 studies. Ten (85%) of the 14 studies were undertaken in the United States of America. Instruments (n = 2) used to evaluate fitness centers were based on the Americans with Disabilities Act compliance legislation and measured domains of physical access (e.g., bathrooms, equipment, parking) and system access (e.g., policies, programs, professional behavior). We calculated weighted percentage mean scores per accessibility domain. The least accessible domain was "hot tubs/whirlpools/saunas/steam rooms" at 33%, with "programs" being the most accessible domain at 68%. CONCLUSIONS: Fitness center accessibility for people with disabilities remains poor. Adopting the principles of universal design in legislation would achieve equitable access for all, thereby allowing people with disabilities to participate actively in their communities with dignity and autonomy.
BACKGROUND: Fitness centers could be ideal places for people with disabilities to engage in the recommended levels of physical activity for healthy well-being. However, one of the primary barriers to participation at fitness centers is an inaccessible built environment. OBJECTIVE: This review study aimed to evaluate the accessibility of public indoor fitness centers for people with disabilities. METHODS: We searched electronic databases and web based search engines using keywords and synonyms for fitness centers, people with disability and accessibility. Observational studies that used standardized measures to evaluate fitness centers were included and critically appraised using a modified version of the checklist for randomized and non-randomized studies developed by Downs and Black. We analyzed the data descriptively. This systematic review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (ID:CRD42016043945). RESULTS: A total of 533 fitness centers were evaluated for accessibility across 14 studies. Ten (85%) of the 14 studies were undertaken in the United States of America. Instruments (n = 2) used to evaluate fitness centers were based on the Americans with Disabilities Act compliance legislation and measured domains of physical access (e.g., bathrooms, equipment, parking) and system access (e.g., policies, programs, professional behavior). We calculated weighted percentage mean scores per accessibility domain. The least accessible domain was "hot tubs/whirlpools/saunas/steam rooms" at 33%, with "programs" being the most accessible domain at 68%. CONCLUSIONS: Fitness center accessibility for people with disabilities remains poor. Adopting the principles of universal design in legislation would achieve equitable access for all, thereby allowing people with disabilities to participate actively in their communities with dignity and autonomy.
Authors: Mary Stuart; Alexander W Dromerick; Richard Macko; Francesco Benvenuti; Brock Beamer; John Sorkin; Sarah Chard; Michael Weinrich Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2019-07-11 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Jacob C Monroe; Byung Joon Pae; Christopher Kargl; Timothy P Gavin; Jason Parker; Susan M Perkins; Yan Han; Janet Klein; Raghu L Motaganahalli; Bruno T Roseguini Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2022-06-30
Authors: Helene Nikolajsen; Emma Victoria Richardson; Louise Fleng Sandal; Birgit Juul-Kristensen; Jens Troelsen Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Date: 2021-07-30