Protocol for an evaluation of the Designing Communities to Support Healthy Living in Aging Residents Study

Jodie A Stearns, Hui Ren, John C Spence, Hayford Avedzi, Karen K Lee, Jodie A Stearns, Hui Ren, John C Spence, Hayford Avedzi, Karen K Lee

Abstract

Background: In collaboration with building developers, the Housing for Health team is contributing to the design of community-based congregate living facilities to support healthy living in older adults. There may also be opportunities to improve the surrounding neighbourhoods by collaborating with the municipalities where the developments are located. We will evaluate whether one or more of these comprehensive interventions lead to changes in the perceived, microscale, and macroscale neighbourhood-built environment (BE) and amenities, and impacts on the physical activity (PA), healthy eating, and social connections of residents. In parallel, we will gather qualitative data to provide a more in-depth understanding of how the BE may facilitate or hinder resident's healthy living outcomes.

Methods: This project employs a quasi-experimental pre-post design with at least one or more intervention and control sites. The quantitative BE evaluation will include pre- and post-intervention assessments of neighbourhood macroscale (e.g., layout of communities) and microscale (e.g., street details and characteristics) changes using Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Microscale Audit Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS) audits, respectively. The quantitative resident evaluation will include self-report (i.e., surveys) and objective assessments (i.e., accelerometers, Global Positioning System [GPS]) of residents at baseline (3-6-months pre-move-in) and follow-up (3-6-months and 9-12-months post-move-in if possible). The qualitative resident-environment component will involve in-depth semi-structured interviews post-intervention with building residents, family members, and stakeholders involved in the design/development and/or operation of the intervention site(s). Participant observations will be completed in the building and neighbourhood environments of the intervention site(s).

Discussion: Findings will provide evidence on whether and how comprehensive changes to the BE and amenities of at least one congregate living facility and the surrounding neighbourhood can impact PA, healthy eating, and social connections of older adults. Successful intervention elements will be scaled up in future work. We will disseminate findings to a broad audience including the scientific community via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and discussion panels; and the private, public, and not-for-profit sectors via reports, public presentations, and/or communications via our partners and their networks.

Trial registration: Protocol ID: 1819-HQ-000051. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05031273. Registered 29 June 2021 with ClinicalTrials.gov.

Keywords: built environment; environmental audits; food environment; healthy eating; older adults; physical activity; qualitative; quasi-experiment; social connections.

Conflict of interest statement

This pilot project involves partnerships with building developers, including private-sector developers, who design, build, and operate housing developments designed for older adults. Their in-kind contributions include involvement of their staff and consultants in meetings with the Housing for Health team regarding the integration of healthier design and amenities into their upcoming building(s) and site(s). They are not funding the evaluation of the intervention. It is possible that their business or organization could be impacted, including financially, by future publications of results of this quasi-experiment.

© 2021. The Author(s).

References

    1. Daskalopoulou C, Stubbs B, Kralj C, Koukounari A, Prince M, Prina AM. Physical activity and healthy ageing: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies. Ageing Research Reviews. 2017;38:6–17. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2017.06.003.
    1. Nicklett EJ, Kadell AR. Fruit and vegetable intake among older adults: A scoping review. Maturitas. 2013;75(4):305–12. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2013.05.005.
    1. Nicholson NR. A review of social isolation: An important but underassessed condition in older adults. J Primary Prevent. 2012;33(2–3):137–52. doi: 10.1007/s10935-012-0271-2.
    1. Paterson DH, Warburton DE. Physical activity and functional limitations in older adults: A systematic review related to Canada’s Physical Activity Guidelines. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition Physical Activity. 2010;7(1):1–22. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-7-38.
    1. Clarke J, Colley R, Janssen I, Tremblay MS. Accelerometer-measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity of Canadian adults, 2007 to 2017. Health Rep. 2019;30(8):3–10.
    1. Cornwell B. Age trends in daily social contact patterns. Research on Aging. 2011;33(5):598–631. doi: 10.1177/0164027511409442.
    1. United Nations. World population aging 2015. . Accessed 30 June 2021.
    1. Bounajm F, Dinh T, Theriault L. Moving Ahead: The Economic Impact of Reducing Physical Inactivity and Sedentary Behaviour. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada; (2014). Available online at: .
    1. World Health Organization. Global age-friendly cities: A guide: World Health Organization; 2007. . Accessed 30 June 2021.
    1. Kerr J, Rosenberg D, Frank L. The role of the built environment in healthy aging: Community design, physical activity, and health among older adults. Journal of Planning Literature. 2012;27(1):43–60. doi: 10.1177/0885412211415283.
    1. Menec VH, Means R, Keating N, Parkhurst G, Eales J. Conceptualizing age-friendly communities. Canadian Journal on Aging/La revue canadienne du vieillissement. 2011;30(3):479–93. doi: 10.1017/S0714980811000237.
    1. Barnett DW, Barnett A, Nathan A, Van Cauwenberg J, Cerin E. Built environmental correlates of older adults’ total physical activity and walking: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition Physical Activity. 2017;14(1):1–24. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0558-z.
    1. Haselwandter EM, Corcoran MP, Folta SC, Hyatt R, Fenton M, Nelson ME. The built environment, physical activity, and aging in the United States: A state of the science review. Journal of Aging Physical Activity. 2015;23(2):323–9. doi: 10.1123/japa.2013-0151.
    1. Dean M, Raats MM, Grunert KG, Lumbers M. Factors influencing eating a varied diet in old age. Public Health Nutrition. 2009;12(12):2421–7. doi: 10.1017/S1368980009005448.
    1. Mercille G, Richard L, Gauvin L, Kestens Y, Shatenstein B, Daniel M, et al. Associations between residential food environment and dietary patterns in urban-dwelling older adults: Results from the VoisiNuAge study. Public Health Nutrition. 2012;15(11):2026–39. doi: 10.1017/S136898001200273X.
    1. Cao Q, Dabelko-Schoeny HI, White KM, Choi M-S. Age-friendly communities and perceived disconnectedness: the role of built environment and social engagement. Journal of Aging Health. 2020;32(9):937–48. doi: 10.1177/0898264319865421.
    1. McCormack GR, Shiell A. In search of causality: A systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition Physical Activity. 2011;8(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-1.
    1. Hunter RF, Christian H, Veitch J, Astell-Burt T, Hipp JA, Schipperijn J. The impact of interventions to promote physical activity in urban green space: A systematic review and recommendations for future research. Soc Sci Med. 2015;124:246–56. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.11.051.
    1. Mayne SL, Auchincloss AH, Michael YL. Impact of policy and built environment changes on obesity-related outcomes: A systematic review of naturally occurring experiments. Obes Rev. 2015;16(5):362–75. doi: 10.1111/obr.12269.
    1. de Vocht F, Katikireddi SV, McQuire C, Tilling K, Hickman M, Craig P. Conceptualising natural and quasi experiments in public health. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01224-x.
    1. Thompson CW, Curl A, Aspinall P, Alves S, Zuin A. Do changes to the local street environment alter behaviour and quality of life of older adults? The ‘DIY Streets’ intervention. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(13):1059–65. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091718.
    1. Curl A, Thompson CW, Aspinall P. The effectiveness of ‘shared space’residential street interventions on self-reported activity levels and quality of life for older people. Landscape Urban Planning. 2015;139:117–25. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.019.
    1. Benton JS, Cotterill S, Anderson J, Macintyre VG, Gittins M, Dennis M, et al. Impact of a low-cost urban green space intervention on wellbeing behaviours in older adults: a natural experimental study. Wellbeing Space Society. 2021;2:100029. doi: 10.1016/j.wss.2021.100029.
    1. Dixon BN, Ugwoaba UA, Brockmann AN, Ross KM. Associations between the built environment and dietary intake, physical activity, and obesity: A scoping review of reviews. Obes Rev. 2021;22(4):e13171. doi: 10.1111/obr.13171.
    1. Michie S, Van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science. 2011;6(1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-1.
    1. Lee K. Fit Cities: My Quest to Improve the World’s Health and Wellness–Including Yours. Toronto: Doubleday Canada; 2020.
    1. Moatari-Kazerouni A, Pennathur P, Tucker SJ, Leyden LA. Design implications to increase utilization of stairwells. Workplace Health Safety. 2016;64(2):57–64. doi: 10.1177/2165079915612789.
    1. Kim MJ, Cho ME, Chae HH. A smart community for placemaking in housing complexes. Journal of Asian Architecture Building Engineering. 2014;13(3):539–46. doi: 10.3130/jaabe.13.539.
    1. Mustafaoğlu R, Unver B, Karatosun V. Evaluation of stair climbing in elderly people. Journal of Back Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation. 2015;28(3):509–16. doi: 10.3233/BMR-140549.
    1. Zimring C, Joseph A, Nicoll GL, Tsepas S. Influences of building design and site design on physical activity: Research and intervention opportunities. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28(2):186–93. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.025.
    1. Kim D, Ohara K. A study on the role of gardening and planning of green environments for daily use by residents in senior housing. Journal of Asian Architecture Building Engineering. 2010;9(1):55–61. doi: 10.3130/jaabe.9.55.
    1. Aldred R, Jungnickel K. Matter in or out of place? Bicycle parking strategies and their effects on people, practices and places. Social Cultural Geography. 2013;14(6):604–24. doi: 10.1080/14649365.2013.790993.
    1. Rosso AL, Grubesic TH, Auchincloss AH, Tabb LP, Michael YL. Neighborhood amenities and mobility in older adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(5):761–9. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt032.
    1. O’Dare Wilson K. Community food environments and healthy food access among older adults: A review of the evidence for the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP) Soc Work Health Care. 2017;56(4):227–43. doi: 10.1080/00981389.2016.1265631.
    1. Cain K, Millstein R, Geremia C. Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS): Data Collection & Scoring Manual. University California San Diego. 2012. . Accessed 30 June 2021.
    1. Chudyk AM, Winters M, Moniruzzaman M, Ashe MC, Gould JS, McKay H. Destinations matter: The association between where older adults live and their travel behavior. Journal of Transport Health. 2015;2(1):50–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2014.09.008.
    1. Winters M, Voss C, Ashe MC, Gutteridge K, McKay H, Sims-Gould J. Where do they go and how do they get there? Older adults’ travel behaviour in a highly walkable environment. Soc Sci Med. 2015;133:304–12. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.006.
    1. Phansikar M, Mullen SP. Exploring active travel and leisure-time physical activity relationships with cognition among older adults. Journal of Aging Physical Activity. 2019;28(4):580–7. doi: 10.1123/japa.2019-0125.
    1. Millstein RA, Cain KL, Sallis JF, Conway TL, Geremia C, Frank LD, et al. Development, scoring, and reliability of the Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS) BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):1–15. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-403.
    1. Migueles JH, Cadenas-Sanchez C, Ekelund U, Nyström CD, Mora-Gonzalez J, Löf M, et al. Accelerometer data collection and processing criteria to assess physical activity and other outcomes: A systematic review and practical considerations. Sports Med. 2017;47(9):1821–45. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0716-0.
    1. Choi L, Liu Z, Matthews CE, Buchowski MS. Validation of accelerometer wear and nonwear time classification algorithm. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(2):357. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181ed61a3.
    1. HABITUS. [Available from: . Accessed 1 September 2021.
    1. Frehlich L, Friedenreich C, Nettel-Aguirre A, McCormack GR. Test-retest reliability of a modified International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) to capture neighbourhood physical activity. Journal of Human Sport Exercise. 2018;13:174–87. doi: 10.14198/jhse.2018.131.17.
    1. Green SH, Glanz K. Development of the perceived nutrition environment measures survey. Am J Prev Med. 2015;49(1):50–61. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.004.
    1. Kitchen P, Williams AM, Gallina M. Sense of belonging to local community in small-to-medium sized Canadian urban areas: a comparison of immigrant and Canadian-born residents. BMC Psychology. 2015;3(1):1–17. doi: 10.1186/s40359-015-0085-0.
    1. Sirgy MJ, Rahtz DR, Cicic M, Underwood R. A method for assessing residents’ satisfaction with community-based services: A quality-of-life perspective. Soc Indic Res. 2000;49(3):279–316. doi: 10.1023/A:1006990718673.
    1. Mesch GS, Manor O. Social ties, environmental perception, and local attachment. Environment Behavior. 1998;30(4):504–19. doi: 10.1177/001391659803000405.
    1. Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F. Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997;277(5328):918–24. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5328.918.
    1. Sallis JF, Kerr J, Carlson JA, Norman GJ, Saelens BE, Durant N, et al. Evaluating a brief self-report measure of neighborhood environments for physical activity research and surveillance: Physical Activity Neighborhood Environment Scale (PANES) Journal of Physical Activity Health. 2010;7(4):533–40. doi: 10.1123/jpah.7.4.533.
    1. Jenkinson C, Layte R, Jenkinson D, Lawrence K, Petersen S, Paice C, et al. A shorter form health survey: can the SF-12 replicate results from the SF-36 in longitudinal studies? J Public Health. 1997;19(2):179–86. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubmed.a024606.
    1. Keyworth C, Epton T, Goldthorpe J, Calam R, Armitage CJ. Acceptability, reliability, and validity of a brief measure of capabilities, opportunities, and motivations (“COM-B”) Br J Health Psychol. 2020;25(3):474–501. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12417.
    1. Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology. The Canadian Physical Activity, Fitness & Lifestyle Approach: CSEP - Health & Fitness Program’s Health-Related Appraisal & Counselling Strategy. 3 ed. Ottawa, ON2004.
    1. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112(1):155. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155.
    1. Smith JA, Shinebourne P. Interpretative phenomenological analysis: American Psychological Association; 2012.
    1. Karin D, Nyström M, Dahlberg H. Reflective lifeworld research: Studentlitteratur, Lund; 2007.
    1. Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. 2014. In: Encyclopedia of critical psychology [Internet]. New York, NY: Springer; [1947-52].
    1. Ball K, Jeffery RW, Crawford DA, Roberts RJ, Salmon J, Timperio AF. Mismatch between perceived and objective measures of physical activity environments. Prev Med. 2008;47(3):294–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.05.001.
    1. Housing for Health. . Accessed 30 June 2021.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj