| Literature DB >> 31443443 |
Ru Zhang1, Yanping Duan2, Walter Brehm3, Petra Wagner4.
Abstract
AIMS: The present study aimed to examine and compare the socioecological correlates of park-based physical activity (PA) among Hong Kong and Leipzig older adults in terms of types of activity areas, perceived park environment, psychosocial factors, and the interactions between the perceived park environmental and psychosocial factors.Entities:
Keywords: active living; older adults; park-based physical activity; perceived park environment; socioecological model; urban parks
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31443443 PMCID: PMC6747084 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16173048
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Descriptive statistics for the observed and survey sample characteristics by city.
| Hong Kong | Leipzig |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Total observed older adults, | 3457 | 2665 | ||
| | ||||
| Males | 2006 (58.0%) | 1408 (52.8%) | 16.46 | <0.001 |
| Females | 1451 (42.0%) | 1257 (47.2%) | ||
| | ||||
| White | 18 (0.5%) | 2624 (98.5%) | – | – |
| Asian | 3439 (99.5%) | 29 (1.1%) | ||
| Other | 0 (0) | 12 (0.5%) | ||
| | ||||
| Mild | 1693 (49.0%) | 1296 (48.6%) | 484.27 | <0.001 |
| Moderate | 1052 (30.4%) | 1288 (48.3%) | ||
| Vigorous | 712 (20.6%) | 81 (3.0%) | ||
| | ||||
| Playgrounds | 320 (9.3%) | 50 (1.9%) | – | – |
| Lawn spaces | 39 (1.1%) | 48 (1.8%) | ||
| Fitness areas | 725 (21.0%) | 12 (0.5%) | ||
| Sports fields | 547 (15.8%) | 2 (0.1%) | ||
| Skateparks | 2 (0.1%) | – | ||
| Fastened spaces | 138 (4.0%) | – | ||
| Paths | 1686 (48.8%) | 2553 (95.8%) | ||
|
| ||||
| Total participants, | 317 | 311 | ||
| | ||||
| Self-efficacy a | 3.05 (0.95) | 3.43 (0.83) | 5.22 | <0.001 |
| Enjoyment b | 3.93 (0.80) | 4.70 (0.60) | 13.45 | <0.001 |
| Perceived benefits b | 3.73 (0.64) | 3.83 (0.70) | 1.84 | 0.07 |
| Perceived barriers b | 2.27 (0.78) | 1.43 (0.38) | −16.82 | <0.001 |
| Social support b | 2.82 (0.96) | 3.17 (1.29) | 3.83 | <0.001 |
| | ||||
| Park safety c | 3.34 (0.59) | 3.48 (0.55) | 3.11 | 0.002 |
| Attractiveness c | 3.07 (0.53) | 3.44 (0.41) | 9.99 | <0.001 |
| Park features c | 3.22 (0.54) | 3.24 (0.58) | 0.56 | 0.58 |
| Park distance d | 2.02 (0.95) | 2.27 (1.11) | 3.11 | 0.002 |
| | 859.11 (790.17) | 737.22 (571.22) | −2.16 | 0.03 |
Note. M = Mean; SD = Standard deviation; PA = Physical activity. Row percentages may not be 100% due to rounding. – Not relevant. a: from 1 (I am sure I cannot) to 5 (I am sure I can); b: from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree); c: from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree); d: from 1 (less than 5 min) to 5 (more than 30 min).
Results of negative binominal regression analyses assessing the associations between number of older adults observed being active in parks and the types of activity areas.
| Factors | Hong Kong ( | Leipzig ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| (95% CI) |
|
| (95% CI) |
| |
| Covariates | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Small | 1.18 | (1.09, 1.28) | <0.001 | 0.85 | (0.76, 0.95) | 0.004 |
| Big | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
| | ||||||
| Male | 0.98 | (0.91, 1.07) | 0.69 | 1.07 | (0.96, 1.21) | 0.23 |
| Female | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
| | ||||||
| Morning | 1.21 | (1.10, 1.34) | <0.001 | 0.87 | (0.74, 1.03) | 0.11 |
| Noon | 1.11 | (0.99, 1.23) | 0.07 | 0.92 | (0.79, 1.07) | 0.29 |
| Afternoon | 1.24 | (1.11, 1.38) | <0.001 | 1.25 | (1.07, 1.47) | 0.01 |
| Evening | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
| | ||||||
| Weekday | 1.02 | (0.95, 1.10) | 0.60 | 0.79 | (0.71, 0.88) | <0.001 |
| Weekend | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
| | ||||||
| Fall | 1.04 | (0.96, 1.12) | 0.37 | 0.95 | (0.84, 1.06) | 0.34 |
| Spring | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
| Main effects | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Playgrounds | 0.35 | (0.31, 0.40) | <0.001 | 0.26 | (0.24, 0.29) | <0.001 |
| Lawn spaces | 0.87 | (0.54, 1.42) | 0.58 | 0.74 | (0.36, 1.55) | 0.43 |
| Fitness areas | 0.34 | (0.31, 0.38) | <0.001 | 0.33 | (0.23, 0.46) | <0.001 |
| Sports fields | 0.45 | (0.40, 0.51) | <0.001 | 0.25 | (0.22, 0.29) | <0.001 |
| Skateparks | 0.40 | (0.35, 0.45) | <0.001 | – | – | – |
| Fastened spaces | 0.56 | (0.45, 0.71) | <0.001 | – | – | – |
| Path | (1.00) | – | – | (1.00) | – | – |
Note. OR = Odds ratio; 95% CI = 95% confidence interval. – Not relevant.
Results of the associations between park-based physical activity and each of the perceived park environmental and psychosocial factors in older adults from Hong Kong and Leipzig.
| Predictors |
|
| 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Park safety | 124.68 (76.68) | 0.10 | (−26.29, 275.64) |
| Attractiveness | 145.34 (86.23) | 0.10 | (−24.43, 315.10) |
| Park features | 6.69 (86.02) | 0.01 | (−162.67, 176.04) |
| Park distance | −43.10 (49.08) | −0.05 | (−139.72, 53.52) |
|
| |||
| Self-efficacy | 251.18 (45.68) | 0.31 *** | (161.25, 341.11) |
| Enjoyment | 304.61 (55.71) | 0.31 *** | (194.92, 414.29) |
| Perceived benefits | 365.00 (70.09) | 0.30 *** | (227.00, 502.99) |
| Perceived barriers | −400.02 (57.08) | −0.39 *** | (−512.40, −287.63) |
| Social support | 8.80 (48.94) | 0.01 | (−87.55, 105.15) |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Park safety | 96.00 (60.76) | 0.09 | (−23.58, 215.57) |
| Attractiveness | 195.81 (80.76) | 0.14 * | (36.88, 354.75) |
| Park features | 184.89 (54.42) | 0.19 ** | (77.79, 291.98) |
| Park distance | −73.36 (29.15) | −0.14 * | (−130.73, −15.99) |
|
| |||
| Self-efficacy | 143.69 (39.02) | 0.21 *** | (66.91, 220.47) |
| Enjoyment | 208.22 (53.72) | 0.22 *** | (102.50, 313.93) |
| Perceived benefits | 116.13 (46.96) | 0.14 * | (23.72, 208.55) |
| Perceived barriers | −443.56 (82.46) | −0.31 *** | (−605.85, −281.27) |
| Social support | 30.92 (26.50) | 0.07 | (−21.23, 83.07) |
Note. B = Unstandardized coefficients; SE = Standard error; 95% CI = 95% confidence interval. a: Control variables in Hong Kong included age and gender; b: Control variables in Leipzig included marital status; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, 2 tailed.
Results of the hierarchical multiple regression analysis predicting the perceived park environment, psychosocial factors and their interactions in the associations with park-based PA among older adults from Hong Kong and Leipzig.
| Predictors | Hong Kong ( | Leipzig ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 95% CI |
|
| 95% CI | |
| Block1: Control variables | ||||||
| Gender | −185.02 (86.02) | −0.12 * | (−354.42, −15.63) | – | – | – |
| Age | 7.27 (6.39) | 0.06 | (−5.31, 19.85) | – | – | – |
| Marital status | – | – | – | −23.54 (36.02) | −0.04 | (−94.47, 47.40) |
| Block2: Psychosocial factors | ||||||
| Self-efficacy | 140.51 (50.60) | 0.18 ** | (40.87, 240.15) | 92.38 (39.72) | 0.14 * | (14.16, 170.60) |
| Enjoyment | 54.26 (76.78) | 0.06 | (−96.95, 205.47) | 28.19 (70.81) | 0.03 | (−111.24, 167.62) |
| Perceived benefits | 108.99 (88.42) | 0.09 | (−65.13, 283.11) | 40.14 (49.27) | 0.05 | (−56.87, 137.16) |
| Perceived barriers | −283.92 (67.68) | −0.28 *** | (−417.21, −150.63) | −342.91 (94.04) | −0.25 *** | (−528.09, -157.72) |
| Block3: Perceived park environment | ||||||
| Park features | – | – | – | 116.90 (63.48) | 0.12 | (−8.10, 241.91) |
| Park distance | – | – | – | −49.27 (28.98) | −0.10 | (−106.32, 7.78) |
| Attractiveness | – | – | – | 24.19 (91.11) | 0.02 | (−155.23, 203.61) |
| Block 4: Interactions | – | – | ||||
| Attractiveness × self-efficacy | – | – | – | −13.98 (102.93) | −0.01 | (−216.66, 188.70) |
| Attractiveness × enjoyment | – | – | – | 92.50 (168.29) | 0.05 | (−238.88, 423.89) |
| Attractiveness × perceived benefits | – | – | – | −177.66 (138.32) | −0.12 | (−450.04, 94.72) |
| Attractiveness × perceived barriers | – | – | – | −8.28 (239.49) | −0.003 | (−479.87, 463.31) |
| Park distance × self-efficacy | – | – | – | −15.72 (33.30) | −0.03 | (−81.30, 49.87) |
| Park distance × enjoyment | – | – | – | 31.49 (60.27) | 0.04 | (−87.19, 150.17) |
| Park distance × perceived benefits | – | – | – | −74.53 (48.60) | −0.11 | (−170.24, 21.18) |
| Park distance × perceived barriers | – | – | – | 29.37 (83.47) | 0.02 | (−135.00, 193.75) |
| Park features × self-efficacy | – | – | – | −157.63 (73.48) | −0.15 * | (−302.33, -12.94) |
| Park features × enjoyment | – | – | – | −4.26 (160.35) | −0.003 | (−320.01, 311.50) |
| Park features × perceived benefits | – | – | – | 67.04 (103.03) | 0.05 | (−135.85, 269.92) |
| Park features × perceived barriers | – | – | – | −177.80 (186.25) | −0.09 | (−544.56, 188.97) |
Note. B = Unstandardized coefficients; SE = Standard error; β = Standardized coefficient; 95% CI = 95% confidence intervals. – Not relevant. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, 2 tailed.
Figure 1The interaction between perceived park features and self-efficacy in the association with park-based physical activity among Leipzig older adults.