Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 1273–1282 | Cite as

Mobility impairment, social engagement, and life satisfaction among the older population in China: a structural equation modeling analysis

  • Linna Li
  • Becky P. Y. Loo
Article
  • 497 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Revealing the relationship between mobility impairment and life satisfaction can help to propose effective interventions to secure mobility and life satisfaction. However, the relationship remains unclear and lacks quantitative evidence in China. This study therefore assesses the association of mobility impairment, social engagement, and life satisfaction among the older population in China.

Methods

Based on the sample of China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Survey database in 2013, a structural equation modeling is established. The sample size is 4245 with 55.9% with mobility impairment.

Results

The model shows that the length of suffering from disability is significantly related to mobility impairment (β = 0.058, p < 0.001). Mobility impairment is inversely related to social engagement (β = −0.300, p < 0.001) and life satisfaction (β = −0.311, p < 0.001). Social engagement is positively related to life satisfaction (β = 0.211, p < 0.001). Moreover, the relationships have some differences for the seniors with different sociodemographic characteristics and living in different residential areas.

Conclusions

As seniors get older, they tend to have more severe mobility impairment and participate less in social activities. Those with higher mobility impairment are more likely to report lower life satisfaction partly because they usually participate less in social activities. Different strategies are suggested to be adopted to improve the life satisfaction of the older population from the aspects of promoting mobility and social engagement, including improving the design of transport facilitates, providing assistive facilities for the seniors with severe mobility impairment, promoting the accessibility of community leisure and healthcare services, and constructing more community senior activity centers.

Keywords

Mobility Social engagement Life satisfaction Aging China Structural equation modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) team for providing the data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The authors declare that ethics approval is not required for this study since it uses secondary data source. Details of the ethical and sampling procedures of the data source are provided in the methodology section of the paper.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Banister, D., & Bowling, A. (2004). Quality of life for the elderly: The transport dimension. Transport Policy, 11, 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bowling, A., Seetai, S., Morris, R., & Ebrahim, S. (2007). Quality of life among older people with poor functioning. The influence of perceived control over life. Age and Ageing, 36, 310–315.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bentley, J. P., Brown, C. J., McGwin, G., Jr., Sawyer, P., Allman, R. M., & Roth, D. L. (2013). Functional Status, life-space mobility, and quality of life: A longitudinal mediation analysis. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1621–1632.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blace, N. P. (2012). Functional ability, participation in activities and life satisfaction of the older people. Asian Social Science, 8(3), 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang, Y. (2010). Factors in social engagement of the aged. Journal of Community Development, 103, 225–235.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    CHARLS Research Team. (2013). Challenges of population aging in China: Evidence from the National Baseline Survey of the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Beijing: National Survey of Development, Peking University.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fagerström, C., & Borglin, G. (2010). Mobility, functional ability and health-related quality of life among people of 60 years or older. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 22, 387–394.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fagerström, C., Holst, G., & Hallberg, I. R. (2007). Feeling hindered by health problems and functional capacity at 60 years and above. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 44, 181–201.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feng, J., Dijst, M., Wissink, B., & Prillwitz, J. (2013). The impacts of household structure on the travel behaviour of seniors and young parents in China. Journal of Transport Geography, 30, 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hartman, C. A., Manos, T. M., Winter, C., Hartman, D. M., Li, B., & Smith, J. C. (2000). Effects of T’ai Chi training on function and quality of life indicators in older adults with osteoarthritis. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48, 1553–1559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu, X., Wang, J., & Wang, L. (2013). Understanding the travel behavior of elderly people in the developing country: A case study of Changchun, China. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 96, 873–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iezzoni, L. I., McCarthy, E. P., Davis, R. B., & Siebens, H. (2001). Mobility difficulties are not only a problem of old age. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16, 235–243.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Loo, B. P. Y., & Lam, W. W. Y. (2012). Geographic accessibility around health care facilities for elderly residents in Hong Kong: A microscale walkability assessment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 39, 629–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Metz, D. (2000). Mobility of older people and their quality of life. Transport Policy, 7, 149–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    National Bureau of statistics of China. (2014). China statistical yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health. (2007). Why population aging matters: A global perspective. Washington, DC: Department of State.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Newsom, J. T., & Schulz, R. (1996). Social support as a mediator in the relation between functional status and quality of life in older adults. Psychology and Aging, 11(1), 34–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nordbakke, S., & Schwanen, T. (2014). Well-being and mobility: A theoretical framework and literature review focusing on older people. Mobilities, 9(1), 104–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Park, N. S. (2009). The relationship of social engagement to psychological well-being of older adults in assisted living facilities. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 28(4), 461–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pei, Y., Gunawan, S., & Chich-Jen, S. (2014). Correlations between social engagement and quality of life of the elderly China. Revista International de Socialogogia (RIS), 72(2), 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spinney, J. E., Scott, D. M., & Newbold, K. B. (2009). Transport mobility benefits and quality of life: A time-use perspective of elderly Canadians. Transport Policy, 16, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stanley, J. K., Hensher, D. A., Stanley, J. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2011). Mobility, social exclusion and well-being: Exploring the links. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 45, 789–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Strauss, J., Lei, X., Park, A., Shen, Y., Smith, J. P., Yang, Z., et al. (2010). Health outcomes and socio-economic status among the elderly in China: Evidence from the CHARLS pilot. Journal of Population Ageing, 3, 111–142.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sun, X., Lucas, H., Meng, Q., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Associations between living arrangements and health-related quality of life of urban elderly people: A study from China. Quality of Life Research, 20, 359–369.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2013). World population aging 2013. United Nations, New York.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    WHOQoL Group. (1993). Measuring quality of life: The development of the World Health Organization quality of life instrument (WHOQOL). Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yeung, W. J., & Xu, Z. (2012). Economic stress, quality of life, and mortality for the oldest-old in China. Social Indicators Research, 108, 131–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yong, V., Saito, Y., & Chan, A. (2010). Changes in the prevalence of mobility limitations and mobile life expectancy of older adults in Singapore, 1995–2005. Journal of Aging and Health, 22, 120–140.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zhang, Y., Li, Y., Liu, Q., & Li, C. (2014). The built environment and walking activity of the elderly: An empirical analysis in the Zhongshan Metropolitan area, China. Sustainability, 6, 1076–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ziegler, F., & Schwanen, T. (2011). I like to go out to be energised by different people: An exploratory analysis of mobility and wellbeing in later life. Ageing and Society, 31, 758–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zhang, Z., Mao, B., Liu, M., Chen, J., & Guo, J. (2007). Analysis of travel characteristics of elders in Beijing. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 7, 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeographyThe University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations