4.6 Article

Mobility disability and the urban built environment

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 168, 期 5, 页码 506-513

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn185

关键词

aging; lower extremity; mobility limitation; social environment; urban health

资金

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [K01EH000286]
  2. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [RO1HD050467, R24HD04786]
  3. University of Michigan Interdisciplinary Center on Social Inequality, Mind, and Body (Life Course Core)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research on the effects of the built environment in the pathway from impairment to disability has been largely absent. Using data from the Chicago Community Adult Health Study (2001-2003), the authors examined the effect of built environment characteristics on mobility disability among adults aged 45 or more years (n = 1,195) according to their level of lower extremity physical impairment. Built environment characteristics were assessed by using systematic social observation to independently rate street and sidewalk quality in the block surrounding each respondent's residence in the city of Chicago (Illinois). Using multinomial logistic regression, the authors found that street conditions had no effect on outdoor mobility among adults with only mild or no physical impairment. However, among adults with more severe impairment in neuromuscular and movement-related functions, the difference in the odd ratios for reporting severe mobility disability was over four times greater when at least one street was in fair or poor condition (characterized by cracks, potholes, or broken curbs). When all streets were in good condition, the odds of reporting mobility disability were attenuated in those with lower extremity impairment. If street quality could be improved, even somewhat, for those adults at greatest risk for disability in outdoor mobility, the disablement process could be slowed or even reversed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据