文章基本信息

标题：Association of Park Size, Distance, and Features With Physical Activity in Neighborhood Parks
本地全文：下载
作者：Andrew T. Kaczynski ; Luke R. Potwarka ; Brian E. Saelens 等
期刊名称：American journal of public health
印刷版ISSN：0090-0036
出版年度：2008
卷号：98
期号：8
页码：1451-1456
DOI：10.2105/AJPH.2007.129064
语种：English
出版社：American Public Health Association
摘要：Objectives. We studied whether park size, number of features in the park, and distance to a park from participants’ homes were related to a park being used for physical activity. Methods. We collected observational data on 28 specific features from 33 parks. Adult residents in surrounding areas (n=380) completed 7-day physical activity logs that included the location of their activities. We used logistic regression to examine the relative importance of park size, features, and distance to participants’ homes in predicting whether a park was used for physical activity, with control for perceived neighborhood safety and aesthetics. Results. Parks with more features were more likely to be used for physical activity; size and distance were not significant predictors. Park facilities were more important than were park amenities. Of the park facilities, trails had the strongest relationship with park use for physical activity. Conclusions. Specific park features may have significant implications for park-based physical activity. Future research should explore these factors in diverse neighborhoods and diverse parks among both younger and older populations. Physical inactivity has consistently been linked to greater obesity prevalence and numerous related chronic diseases. 1 ^– 5 Socioecologic models of physical activity promotion emphasize how the built environment facilitates or restricts opportunities for exercise. 6 ^, 7 Within this paradigm, parks have been acknowledged as important behavior settings for physical activity. 8 ^– 11 For example, older adults rate opportunities for physical activity as one of the most salient benefits of parks. 12 In another study, parks were identified as the most common place for physical activity by residents in several Los Angeles neighborhoods. 13 However, most research on relationships between parks and physical activity has lacked specificity and detail and has evaluated broad factors such as total park area or proximity. 14 A recent review of studies examining physical activity and park proximity found that 8 of 13 studies showed some significant positive associations. 14 However, these studies generally used simple, single-item, categorical indicators of park proximity (e.g., is there a park near your home?), without examining the total number of parks or availability of parkland within a specified distance or a more precise measure of park proximity. The few studies that examined the aggregate number of parks or amount of proximal parkland generally reported strong associations with physical activity. 15 ^– 18 Researchers have suggested that park features and park size may also be correlates of park-related physical activity. Few studies have examined park size in relation to residents’ physical activity. However, one study found that park attractiveness and proximity were only predictive of nearby residents’ self-reported activity when park size was taken into account. 19 With respect to features, Cohen et al. 20 reported that adolescent girls who lived near (< 0.5 miles) parks with playgrounds, basketball courts, multipurpose rooms (usually gymnasiums), walking paths, swimming areas, and tracks had higher levels of nonschool physical activity than did girls not living near parks with such facilities. Having nearby parks with streetlights, floodlights, shaded areas, and drinking fountains was also related to greater physical activity. By contrast, living near parks with skateboard areas and areas for lawn games was negatively related to girls’ physical activity. 20 Another study in 4 suburban parks reported increased activity intensity in parks with more overall site improvements and in those with organized activities, trails or paths, play structures, and sport fields or courts. However, having picnic shelters with grills in the park was related to lower activity intensity. 21 Park proximity, size, and features have been minimally investigated in relation to physical activity, and little research has examined these factors concurrently. In our study, we addressed this prior limitation and also responded to calls for increased specificity in ecologic models 22 by relating characteristics of individual parks to the physical activity that occurred in specific parks. Overall, we sought to determine the degree to which park size, number of features in the park, and proximity of the park from participants’ homes were related to the use of a park for physical activity.