Centre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, New Zealand.
Centre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, New Zealand.
Disabil Health J. 2014 Jan;7(1):26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2013.06.003. Epub 2013 Jul 22.
Exercise is necessary for overall health and well-being for all individuals. For people with disabilities, fitness and recreational sports centers are reported to be generally inaccessible and not user friendly.
This review study aimed to identify instruments that assess access to fitness and recreational sports centers and to appraise the identified instruments' qualitative and quantitative attributes.
We systematically searched databases (AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science for the years spanning 1950 to April 2012) and web-based search engines (Google and Google Scholar) to identify instruments, published in English that objectively assess the accessibility of fitness and recreational sports centers. Identified instruments were critically appraised using the qualitative attributes QAPAQ Checklist Part I and the COSMIN checklist for measurement properties.
Seven instruments were included in this review: ADA Accessibility Guidelines Checklist for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG); ADA Checklist for Readily Achievable Barrier Removal; Accessibility Instruments Measuring Fitness and Recreation Environments (AIMFREE); Community Health Environment Checklist - Mobility (CHEC-M); Removing Barriers to Health Clubs and Fitness Facilities (RBHCFF); Health Empowerment Zone Environmental Tool Shortened Environmental Checklist: Fitness Centre Survey (HEZEAT-FCS); Community Health Environment Checklist - Exercise Facilities (CHEC-Fit). Only the AIMFREE and CHEC-M have aspects of measurement properties evaluated.
We recommend that instrument developers consider conducting full psychometric assessment of their instruments using adequate sample sizes. We also recommend they consider scoring methods and respondent burden to provide scientifically robust instruments that are easy to administer.
运动对所有人的整体健康和幸福都是必要的。对于残疾人来说,健身和娱乐体育中心通常是无法进入的,也不便于用户使用。
本综述研究旨在确定评估健身和娱乐体育中心可及性的工具,并评估已确定工具的定性和定量属性。
我们系统地检索了数据库(AMED、CINAHL、EMBASE、MEDLINE、SCOPUS、SPORTDiscus 和 Web of Science,涵盖 1950 年至 2012 年 4 月)和基于网络的搜索引擎(Google 和 Google Scholar),以确定以英文发表的客观评估健身和娱乐体育中心可及性的工具。使用定性属性 QAPAQ 清单第一部分和 COSMIN 测量特性清单对确定的工具进行批判性评估。
本综述共纳入 7 种工具:《美国残疾人法案》(ADA)建筑和设施可及性指南清单(ADAAG);ADA 无障碍改造简易达成清单;用于评估健身和娱乐环境的可及性工具(AIMFREE);社区健康环境检查清单-行动能力(CHEC-M);消除健康俱乐部和健身设施障碍(RBHCFF);健康赋权区环境工具简化健身中心调查环境检查表(HEZEAT-FCS);社区健康环境检查清单-运动设施(CHEC-Fit)。只有 AIMFREE 和 CHEC-M 评估了测量特性的某些方面。
我们建议工具开发者在使用足够大的样本量时考虑对其工具进行全面心理测量评估。我们还建议他们考虑评分方法和受访者负担,以提供易于管理的科学稳健工具。