Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1089b, 1081HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Donorstudies, Sanquin Research, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2018 Jun 18;15(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12966-018-0689-x.
The availability of outdoor recreational facilities is associated with increased leisure-time physical activity (PA). We investigated how much of this association is attributable to selection effects, and explored whether usage of recreational facilities was an explanatory mechanism.
We analysed data from 5199 participants in the SPOTLIGHT survey residing in five European urban regions. Adults completed a survey and a Google Street View-based virtual audit was conducted to objectively measure the availability of outdoor recreational facilities in the residential neighbourhood. We used negative binomial GEE models to examine the association between objective and subjective availability of outdoor recreational facilities and leisure-time PA, and explored whether this association was attenuated after adjustment for socioeconomic status and preference for neighbourhoods with recreational facilities (as indicators of self-selection). We examined whether reported use of recreational facilities was associated with leisure-time PA (as explanatory mechanism), and summarized the most important motivations for (not) using recreational facilities.
Subjective - but not objective - availability of outdoor recreational facilities was associated with higher levels of total leisure-time PA. After adjustment for self-selection (which attenuated the association by 25%), we found a 25% difference in weekly minutes of total leisure-time PA between individuals with and without self-reported availability of outdoor recreational facilities. For our study population, this translates to about 28 min per week. Participants who reported outdoor recreational facilities to be present but indicated not to use them (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.03;1.22), and those reporting outdoor recreational facilities to be present and to use them (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.22, 1.45) had higher levels of total leisure-time PA than those who reported outdoor recreational facilities not to be present. Proximity to outdoor recreational facilities was the most important motivation for use.
The modest attenuation in the association between availability of outdoor recreational facilities and self-reported leisure-time PA suggests that individuals' higher activity levels may be due more to the perceived availability of outdoor recreational facilities than to self-selection. The use of these facilities seemed to be an important underlying mechanism, and proximity was the main motivator for using recreational facilities.
户外娱乐设施的可用性与休闲时间体力活动(PA)的增加有关。我们研究了这种关联有多少归因于选择效应,并探讨了使用娱乐设施是否是一种解释机制。
我们分析了居住在欧洲五个城市地区的 5199 名参与 SPOTLIGHT 调查的参与者的数据。成年人完成了一项调查,并进行了基于 Google 街景的虚拟审计,以客观测量居住社区的户外娱乐设施的可用性。我们使用负二项式 GEE 模型来检验客观和主观的户外娱乐设施的可用性与休闲时间 PA 之间的关联,并探讨了在调整社会经济地位和对有娱乐设施的社区的偏好(作为自我选择的指标)后,这种关联是否减弱。我们检验了报告的娱乐设施使用是否与休闲时间 PA 相关(作为解释机制),并总结了使用和不使用娱乐设施的最重要动机。
主观的——而不是客观的——户外娱乐设施的可用性与更高水平的总休闲时间 PA 相关。在调整自我选择(减弱了 25%的关联)后,我们发现有自我报告的户外娱乐设施的个体与没有自我报告的个体之间每周总休闲时间 PA 的差异为 25%。对于我们的研究人群,这相当于每周约 28 分钟。报告户外娱乐设施存在但表示不使用的参与者(RR=1.19,95%CI=1.03;1.22),以及报告户外娱乐设施存在且使用的参与者(RR=1.33,95%CI=1.22,1.45)的总休闲时间 PA 水平高于报告户外娱乐设施不存在的参与者。接近户外娱乐设施是使用的最重要动机。
户外娱乐设施的可用性与自我报告的休闲时间 PA 之间的关联的适度减弱表明,个体较高的活动水平可能更多地归因于户外娱乐设施的感知可用性,而不是自我选择。这些设施的使用似乎是一个重要的潜在机制,接近是使用娱乐设施的主要动机。