| Literature DB >> 31569652 |
Jonathan McGavock1,2,3, Nicole Brunton4,5,6, Nika Klaprat4,5,6, Anders Swanson7, Dave Pancoe8, Ed Manley9, Ashini Weerasinghe10, Gillian L Booth11, Kelly Russell4,6, Laura Rosella12, Erin Hobin10.
Abstract
Background: Very few experimental studies exist describing the effect of changes to the built environment and opportunities for physical activity (PA). We examined the impact of an urban trail created on a frozen waterway on visitor counts and PA levels.Entities:
Keywords: epidemiology; obesity; public health; sports and exercise medicine
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31569652 PMCID: PMC6801820 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16193627
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Visual evidence that the intervention consisted of walking (running, skating, and cycling) on water. (A–C): Representation of the frozen waterway at different segments (A) Assiniboine River Heading South; (B) Red River heading south; (C) Red and Assiniboine River Junction. (D–F): Representation of the same points along the waterway in July 2019 providing evidence that the trail network was created on water.
Figure 2Map of trail network. Red dot = location of PYRO-Box Eco-Counter; purple dots = access points for the frozen waterway trail; green lines = permanent trail network accessible for 12 months of the year; purple line = frozen waterway trail.
Natural experiment details. CI, confidence interval.
| Variable | 2017/2018 | 2018/2019 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-Control | Intervention | Post-Control | Pre-Control | Intervention | Post-Control | |
| Start Date | 08/12/2017 | 07/01/2018 | 04/04/2018 | 03/12/2018 | 04/01/2019 | 11/03/2019 |
| End Date | 06/01/2018 | 03/03/2018 | 04/04/2018 | 03/01/2019 | 10/03/2019 | 12/04/2019 |
| Total Days | 20 | 56 | 40 | 31 | 67 | 33 |
| Weekend Days | 5 | 16 | 11 | 8 | 20 | 8 |
| Mean Temp % | −20 °C | −13 °C | −4 °C | −10 °C | −17 °C | −1 °C |
| User Counts | 51,183 | 266,581 | 41,728 | 25,849 | 182,298 | 21,709 |
Trail user demographics.
| Variable | Females | Males | Total (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Household Income | |||
| <$15,000 | 9 | 5 | 14 (6.4%) |
| $15,000–49,000 | 23 | 13 | 36 (16.5%) |
| $50,000–74,999 | 18 | 13 | 31 (14.2%) |
| $75,000–99,999 | 16 | 16 | 32 (14.7%) |
| >$100,000 | 39 | 29 | 68 (31.2%) |
| Prefer not to disclose | 37 (17.0%) | ||
| Ethnicity | |||
| Caucasian | 103 | 61 | 164 (75.2%) |
| Indigenous | 9 | 7 | 16 (7.4%) |
| Asian | 7 | 10 | 17 (7.8%) |
| Other | 7 | 4 | 11 (5.0%) |
| Prefer not to disclose | 10 (4.6%) | ||
| Age (years) | |||
| 18–24 | 8 | 4 | 12 (5.5%) |
| 25–34 | 35 | 20 | 55 (25.2%) |
| 35–44 | 32 | 18 | 50 (23.0%) |
| 45–64 | 44 | 33 | 77 (35.3%) |
| >65 | 5 | 8 | 13 (6.0%) |
| Prefer not to disclose | 11 (5.0%) |
Figure 3Geomap of trail users. Neighbourhoods from which trail users originated mapped according to A—the geographic ethnic make-up of the city of Winnipeg and B—the geographic household income of the city of Winnipeg.
Figure 4Objectively measured trail visits before, during, and after the opening of the frozen waterway trail. Red line = temperature (Y2 axis); grey filled line = daily user counts during control and intervention periods. Lines for control and intervention periods correspond to dates of data collection.
Figure 5Mean daily trail visits during intervention and control periods stratified by type of day. A = weekday day; B = weekend day; * = p < 0.001.
Figure 6Objectively measured physical activity during a single visit to the frozen waterway trail. Data presented are medians with 95% confidence intervals. Additional dots are outliers. A/D—total steps; B/E—total minutes of activity; C/F—total moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA).
Self-reported information on trail use.
| Variable | Females | Males | Total (%) * |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reason for use | |||
| Transportation | 1 | 3 | 4 (1.8%) |
| Exercise/Recreation | 102 | 60 | 164 (75.2%) |
| Both | 24 | 23 | 50 (23.0%) |
| Timing of first visit | |||
| <3 months ago | 27 | 15 | 42 (19.3%) |
| 4–11 months ago | 2 | 1 | 3 (1.3%) |
| 1–3 years ago | 17 | 13 | 30 (13.8%) |
| >3 years ago | 81 | 57 | 143 (66.6%) |
| Travel time to trail | |||
| <5 min | 22 | 11 | 34 (15.6%) |
| 6–15 min | 56 | 41 | 100 (45.9%) |
| 16–29 min | 35 | 25 | 61 (28%) |
| >30 min | 14 | 9 | 23 (10.5%) |
| Average duration per visit | |||
| <30 min | 1 | 9 | 10 (4.6%) |
| 30–44 min | 28 | 18 | 47 (21.6%) |
| 45–59 min | 46 | 14 | 62 (28.4%) |
| 1–2 h | 48 | 42 | 91 (41.7%) |
| >2 h | 4 | 3 | 8 (3.7%) |
| No. visits in the past | |||
| 1 day | 74 | 42 | 119 (54.6%) |
| 2–3 days | 45 | 28 | 74 (33.9%) |
| 4–5 days | 4 | 14 | 19 (8.7%) |
| 6–7 days | 4 | 2 | 6 (2.8%) |
* Note: five users preferred not to disclose their gender and data were removed from the table.