| Literature DB >> 35564870 |
Shan Lu1, Wonseok Oh2, Ryozo Ooka2, Lijun Wang1.
Abstract
Exposure to small public urban green spaces (SPUGS) has been demonstrated to have mental benefits for older adults. However, studies on identifying the objective environmental features of SPUGS and their effects on mental restoration for older adults remain limited. This study employed a multilevel regression model to investigate the restorative and vitalizing effects of the environmental features of 11 SPUGS in Tokyo. Onsite measurements were conducted in Kita-Ku, and 202 older adults were surveyed. The results showed that: (1) The fitting curve of the green view index and Restoration Outcome Scale (ROS) score showed an inverted U shape-both green view index and boundary enclosure had a strong impact on the mental restoration of older adults; (2) The colorfulness index showed the strongest relationship with the vitalizing effect. (3) The sky view factor and number of seats only influenced the ROS score, while the results of revitalization suggest that large areas of water should be avoided. (4) Physiological Equivalent Temperature (PET) was also confirmed to have negative effects on the mental restoration of older adults in autumn. These empirical findings can be used as a resource to promote the mental health of older adults in the design of SPUGS in high-density Asian countries.Entities:
Keywords: environmental features; mental restoration; older adults; small public urban green spaces (SPUGS); thermal comfort
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35564870 PMCID: PMC9100600 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095477
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Figure 1Research framework.
Figure 2Research procedure.
Figure 3Spatial distribution of the aging rate in Kita-ku, Tokyo. They are (a) The full view of Japan; (b) The location of Kita-ku in the Tokyo Metropolitan; (c) The spatial distribution of the older adults in Kita-ku and the location of three targeted parks.
Basic information about the selected parks.
| Basic Information | Park A | Park B | Park C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classification | Neighborhood park | City Block Park | Park |
| Area size (m2) | 2500 | 21,900 | 79,200 |
| Neighborhood aging rate (%) | 36.27 | 25.10 | 21.00 |
| Green cover rate (%) | 52.50 | 59.70 | 72.80 |
| Lawn-grass cover rate (%) | 4.20 | 28.00 | 14.40 |
Microclimate measurements and measurement instruments.
| Microclimate Factors | Instruments | Height (m) | Range | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Air temperature | Temperature sensor IC (RTR503) | 1.1 | 0–55 °C | ±0.3 °C |
| Relative humidity | Humidity sensor IC (RTR503) | 1.1 | 10–95% | ±5% RH |
| Wind velocity | Three-cup type wind speed meter (DT-187) | 1.1 | 0.5–30 m/s | ±0.2 m/s |
| Global temperature | 40 mm ping-pong ball with a class 1 type | 1.1 | −40–125 °C | ±0.5 °C |
Figure 4The fixed weather station.
Figure 5Examples of skyview factor calculation by using image semantic automatic recognition technology and statistic of methods for the three parks. They are (a) Hakusanbori Park; (b) Nishigahara Minnano Park; (c) Kita City Park.
Study participants’ characteristics.
| Variables | Full Sample | Sex | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | ||
|
| |||
| 60–69 | 54 (26.73%) | 31 (24.41%) | 23 (30.67%) |
| 70–79 | 104 (51.49%) | 68 (53.54%) | 36 (48.00%) |
| ≥80 | 44 (21.78%) | 28 (22.05%) | 16 (21.33%) |
|
| |||
| Very healthy | 125 (61.88%) | 80 (62.99%) | 45 (60.00%) |
| Healthy | 72 (35.64%) | 43 (33.86%) | 29 (38.67%) |
| Poor | 5 (2.48%) | 4 (3.15%) | 1 (1.33%) |
|
| |||
| <1 year | 1 (0.50%) | 1 (0.79%) | 0 |
| 1–3 years | 11 (5.45%) | 8 (6.30%) | 3 (4.00%) |
| >3 years | 169 (83.66%) | 103 (81.10%) | 66 (88.00%) |
|
| |||
| 1–2 times per week | 121 (59.90%) | 82 (64.57%) | 39 (52.00%) |
| 3–4 times per week | 81 (40.10%) | 45 (35.43%) | 36 (48.00%) |
|
| |||
| Less than 10 min | 114 (56.44%) | 69 (54.33%) | 45 (60.00%) |
| 10–20 min | 56 (27.72%) | 36 (28.35%) | 20 (26.67%) |
| More than 20 min | 32 (15.84%) | 22 (17.32%) | 10 (13.33%) |
|
| |||
| Less than 10 min | 14 (6.93%) | 8 (6.30%) | 6 (8.00%) |
| 10–30 min | 54 (26.73%) | 29 (22.83%) | 25 (33.33%) |
| Over 30 min | 134 (66.34%) | 90 (70.87%) | 44 (58.67%) |
|
| |||
| Exercise | 85 (42.08%) | 56 (44.09%) | 29 (38.67%) |
| Socializing | 23 (11.39%) | 13 (10.24%) | 10 (13.33%) |
| Relaxation | 55 (27.23%) | 37 (29.13%) | 18 (24.00%) |
| Companionship | 30 (14.85%) | 14 (11.02%) | 16 (21.33%) |
| Passing by/living near | 9 (4.46%) | 7 (5.51%) | 2 (2.67%) |
|
| 1.05 (0.18) | 1.04 (0.18) | 1.06 (0.18) |
|
| 15.24 (4.32) | 14.97 (4.50) | 15.75 (3.94) |
|
| 33.91 (4.00) | 34.03 (4.18) | 33.69 (3.70) |
|
| 5.13 (0.95) | 5.06 (0.93) | 5.25 (0.99) |
The environment feature variables in the research SPUGS.
| a1 | a2 | b1 | b2 | b3 | c1 | c2 | c3 | c4 | c5 | c6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.376 | 0.489 | 0.528 | 0.454 | 0.345 | 0.355 | 0.045 | 0.310 | 1.000 | 0.104 | 0.047 |
|
| 0.375 | 1.200 | 0.840 | 0.610 | 0.900 | 4.000 | 4.000 | 0.280 | 0.030 | 6.670 | 6.470 |
|
| 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
|
| 0.430 | 0.033 | 0.004 | 0.375 | 0.094 | 0.569 | 0.564 | 0.670 | 0.110 | 0.418 | 0.370 |
|
| 25 | 64 | 10 | 30 | 50 | 15 | 20 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 8 |
|
| No | Yes | No | No | Yes | No | No | No | No | No | Yes |
|
| 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 4 |
|
| No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | No |
Multilevel regression results of ROS score.
| Fixed Effects | Coefficient (SE) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Null Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | |
|
| |||
| 70–79 | 0.199 (0.554) | 0.320 (0.527) | |
| Above 80 | 1.197 * (0.672) | 1.018 (0.637) | |
|
| |||
| Female | −0.521 (0.472) | −0.669 (0.467) | |
|
| |||
| Healthy | −0.912 (1.809) | −0.277 (1.690) | |
| Not very healthy | −2.107 (1.826) | −1.715 (1.701) | |
|
| |||
| 1–3 years | 1.549 (3.161) | 1.658 (2.934) | |
| More than 3 years | 0.660 (3.012) | 0.541 (2.778) | |
|
| |||
| 3–4 times per week | −0.048 (0.492) | 0.107 (0.494) | |
|
| |||
| 10–30 min | 2.716 ** (0.941) | 2.971 ** (0.945) | |
| More than 30 min | 3.313 *** (0.887) | 3.196 *** (0.893) | |
|
| |||
| Socializing | 0.862 (0.773) | 0.531 (0.750) | |
| Relaxation | 0.714 (0.693) | 0.636 (0.606) | |
| Companionship | 3.405 ***(0.725) | 2.295 *** (0.722) | |
| Passing by/living near | −0.292 (1.150) | 0.313 (1.132) | |
|
| |||
| 10–20 min walking | −0.018 (0.504) | ||
| More than 20 min walking | −0.380 (0.777) | ||
|
| |||
| Sky view factor | −7.906 * (3.346) | ||
| Boundary enclosure | 1.901 ** (0.665) | ||
| Aspect ratio | −0.319 (0.386) | ||
|
| |||
| Green view index | −4.800 * (2.791) | ||
| Colorfulness index | −3.681 (6.326) | ||
| Water features (no as reference) | −2.226 (2.105) | ||
|
| |||
| Number of seats | 0.502 *** (0.110) | ||
| Pavement (unpaved as reference) | −1.316 (1.788) | ||
|
| |||
| PET | −0.239 *** (0.066) | ||
| Intercept | 34.236 *** (0.610) | 31.233 *** (3.778) | 33.940 *** (4.479) |
| Random effects | |||
| ICC | 0.183 | 0.249 | 9.13e-20 |
| AIC | 1106.4 | 953.9 | 872.959 |
| Log likelihood | −550.200 | −459.945 | −408.480 |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. SE: standard error; ICC: Interclass correlation efficient; AIC: Akaike information criterion.
Figure 6Independent curvilinear associations of environmental feature variables with ROS score. They are (a) The independent curvilinear association of sky view factor with ROS; (b) The independent curvilinear association of boundary enclosure with ROS; (c) The independent curvilinear association of green view index with ROS; (d) The independent curvilinear association of seats number with ROS; (e) The independent curvilinear association of PET with ROS. [Red lines represent point estimates of modeled score of ROS, while the green background areas represent their 95% confidence intervals].
Figure 7Independent curvilinear associations of environmental feature variables with subjective vitality score. They are (a) The independent curvilinear association of green view index with subjective vitality score; (b) The independent curvilinear association of colorfulness index with subjective vitality score; (c) The independent curvilinear association of boundary enclosure with subjective vitality score; (d) The independent curvilinear association of aspect ratio with subjective vitality score. [Red lines represent point estimates of modeled score of revitalization, while the green background areas represent their 95% confidence intervals].
Multilevel regression results of subjective vitality benefits.
| Fixed Effects | Coefficient (SE) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Null Model 4 | Model 5 | Model 6 | |
|
| |||
| 70–79 | 0.291 ** (0.118) | 0.262 * (0.112) | |
| Above 80 | 0.524 ***(0.142) | 0.480 ***(0.135) | |
|
| |||
| Female | 0.293 ** (0.100) | 0.181 (0.099) | |
|
| |||
| Healthy | 0.569 (0.383) | 0.531 (0.359) | |
| Not very healthy | 0.316 (0.386) | 0.226 (0.361) | |
|
| |||
| 1–3 years | −0.375 (0.669) | −0.149 (0.623) | |
| More than 3 years | −0.167 (0.638) | −0.090 (0.589) | |
|
| |||
| 3–4 times per week | −0.024 (0.105) | −0.010 (0.105) | |
|
| |||
| 10–30 min | 0.207 (0.199) | 0.292 (0.200) | |
| More than 30 min | 0.550 ** (0.188) | 0.539 ** (0.189) | |
|
| |||
| Socializing | −0.205 (0.166) | −0.154 (0.159) | |
| Relaxation | 0.137 (0.152) | 0.177 (0.128) | |
| Companionship | 0.501 ***(0.154) | 0.389 ** (0.153) | |
| Passing by/living near | −0.311 (0.245) | −0.153 (0.240) | |
|
| |||
| 10–20 min walking | −0.001 (0.107) | ||
| More than 20 min walking | −0.011 (0.165) | ||
|
| |||
| Sky view factor | −1.273 (0.710) | ||
| Boundary enclosure | 0.598 *** (0.141) | ||
| Aspect ratio | 0.485 *** (0.082) | ||
|
| |||
| Green view index | −2.329 *** (0.592) | ||
| Colorfulness index | 12.287 *** (1.342) | ||
| Water features (no as reference) | −3.158 *** (0.500) | ||
|
| |||
| Number of seats | 0.024 (0.023) | ||
| Pavement (unpaved as reference) | −2.806 *** (0.379) | ||
|
| |||
| PET | −0.005 (0.014) | ||
| Intercept | 4.913 *** (0.190) | 3.761 *** (0.812) | 1.994 * (0.950) |
| Random effects | |||
| ICC | 0.384 | 0.453 | 2.63e-17 |
| AIC | 473.416 | 399.693 | 345.839 |
| Log likelihood | −233.708 | −182.847 | −144.919 |
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001. SE: standard error; ICC: Interclass correlation efficient; AIC: Akaike information criterion.