| Literature DB >> 33734155 |
Jennifer Blackwood1, Rie Suzuki2, Hannah Karczewski1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 33734155 PMCID: PMC8687612 DOI: 10.1519/JPT.0000000000000300
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Geriatr Phys Ther ISSN: 1539-8412 Impact factor: 3.381
Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale-Abbreviated Subscales and Items
| NEWS-A Subscale | Survey Items Used |
|---|---|
| Land use mix | I can do most of my shopping at local stores. |
| Stores are within easy walking distance of my home. | |
| There are many places to go within easy walking distance from my home. | |
| It is easy to walk to a transit stop (bus, train) from my home. | |
| The streets in my neighborhood are hilly, making my neighborhood difficult to walk in. | |
| There are many canyons/hillsides in my neighborhood that limit the number of routes for getting from place to place. | |
| Street connectivity | The distance between intersections in my neighborhood is usually short (≤100 y; the length of a football field or less). |
| There are many 4-way intersections in my neighborhood. | |
| There are many alternative routes for getting from place to place in my neighborhood (I don't have to go the same way every time). | |
| Walking/cycling facilities | There are sidewalks on most of the streets in my neighborhood. |
| The sidewalks in my neighborhood are well maintained (paved, even, and not a lot of cracks). | |
| There are bicycle or pedestrian trails in or near my neighborhood that are easy to get to. | |
| Sidewalks are separated from the road/traffic in my neighborhood by parked cars. | |
| There is a grass/dirt strip that separates the streets from the sidewalks in my neighborhood. | |
| Pedestrian/traffic safety | There is so much traffic along the street I live on that it makes it difficult or unpleasant to walk in my neighborhood. |
| There is so much traffic along nearby streets that it makes it difficult or unpleasant to walk in my neighborhood. | |
| There are crosswalks and pedestrian signals to help walkers cross busy streets in my neighborhood. | |
| The crosswalks in my neighborhood help walkers feel safe crossing busy streets. | |
| When walking in my neighborhood, there are a lot of exhaust fumes (such as from cars and buses). | |
| Crime safety | My neighborhood streets are well lit at night. |
| There is high crime rate in my neighborhood. | |
| The crime rate in my neighborhood makes in unsafe to go on walks during the day. | |
| The crime rate in my neighborhood makes it unsafe to go on walks at night. |
Abbreviation: NEWS-A, Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale-Abbreviated.
Demographic, Physical Activity, and Health-Related Variablesa
| Variable | Recent Fall Group (n = 60) | No-Fall Group (n = 72) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD), y | 69.65 (4.64) | 69.83 (5.33) | .835 |
| Gender, female | 73.30% | 56.90% | .050 |
| Ethnicity, African American | 61.70% | 80.60% | .121 |
| Marital status | |||
| Married | 21.70% | 19.70% | .938 |
| Divorced or separated | 36.60% | 43.60% | |
| Education level, beyond high school | 41.70% | 44.40% | .932 |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg/m2 | 33.57 (8.86) | 27.94 (5.41) | < |
| Health-related variables | |||
| Vision problems | 61.70% | 59.70% |
|
| Numbness in feet | 58.60% | 29.20% |
|
| Medications, >3/d | 86.40% | 66.70% |
|
| Assistive device use | 38.30% | 14.90% |
|
| Physical activity | |||
| Participate in Moderate-intensity physical activity in the past 6 mo | 20.70% | 34.70% | .105 |
| Health-limited activities | |||
| Bathing/dressing | 31.70% | 24.30% | .245 |
| Lifting/carrying groceries | 66.70% | 49.30% |
|
| Climbing 1 flight of stairs | 76.70% | 51.40% | < |
| Climbing several flights of stairs | 79.70% | 58.60% | < |
| Bending, kneeling, stooping | 81.70% | 56.30% | < |
| Walking 1 block | 72.90% | 46.50% |
|
| Walking several blocks | 80.00% | 59.40% | < |
| Walking more than a mile | 83.30% | 63.80% | < |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; SD, standard deviation.
aValues shown are mean (SD) or percent.
Neighborhood Walkability Subscale-Abbreviated Scores in the Recent Fall (n = 60) and No Fall Groups (n = 72)a
| Category | Recent Fall Group (n = 60) | No-Fall Group (n = 72) | 95% Confidence Interval | Effect Size | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land use mix | 2.54 (0.65) | 2.84 (0.68) |
| −0.53, −0.06 | 0.45 |
| Street connectivity | 2.59 (0.82) | 2.74 (0.87) | .323 | −0.44, 0.15 | 0.18 |
| Walking/cycling facilities | 2.52 (0.82) | 2.47 (0.80) | .740 | −0.24, 0.33 | 0.06 |
| Pedestrian/traffic safety | 2.51 (0.73) | 2.66 (0.69) | .221 | −0.40, 0.09 | 0.21 |
| Crime safety | 2.73 (0.98) | 2.63 (0.91) | .544 | −0.23, 0.43 | 0.11 |
aValues shown are mean (SD).
Associations Between Walkability Constructs and Recent Falls in Urban-Dwelling Older Adults After Controlling for Age, Physical Activity, Vision Impairment, Medications, and Body Mass Index
| Walkability Construct | β | Regression Coefficient (SE) | Odds Ratio | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Land use mix | −0.60 | 0.30 | 0.55 | 0.30, 1.00 |
|
| Model | ||||||
| Model 2 | Street connectivity | −0.42 | 0.24 | 0.66 | 0.41, 1.05 | .081 |
| Model | ||||||
| Model 3 | Walking/cycling facilities | −0.06 | 0.25 | 0.94 | 0.58, 1.52 | .796 |
| Model | ||||||
| Model 4 | Pedestrian/traffic safety | −0.16 | 0.29 | 0.86 | 0.49, 1.51 | .594 |
| Model | ||||||
| Model 5 | Crime safety | 0.16 | 0.22 | 1.17 | 0.76, 1.80 | .468 |
| Model | ||||||
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; SE, standard error.