Advertisement

Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 91, Issue 3, pp 446–462 | Cite as

Built Environment and Physical Activity for Transportation in Adults from Curitiba, Brazil

  • Adriano A. F. Hino
  • Rodrigo S. Reis
  • Olga L. Sarmiento
  • Diana C. Parra
  • Ross C. Brownson
Article

Abstract

The goal of this study was to assess the association between features of the built environment and levels of walking and cycling as forms of transportation in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Data collection was conducted through a telephone survey in 2008. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to identify walking or cycling as forms of transportation. The built environment characteristics were obtained through the Geographic Information System for 1,206 adults. Density indicators were computed, considering a radius of 500 m around each individual's household. For the accessibility measures, the shortest distance to selected built environment features (e.g., bus stop, bike path) was used. The association between characteristics of the environment and the practice of walking or cycling was assessed through logistic regressions. After considering individual characteristics, higher-income areas (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.41–0.76), higher density of Bus Rapid Transit stations (OR = 1.50, 95 % CI = 1.22–1.84), and the proportion of residential (OR = 1.25, 95 % CI = 1.02–1.53) and commercial (OR = 1.47, 95 % CI = 1.13–1.91) areas were associated with any walking prevalence (≥10 min/week). Higher access to bike paths (OR = 0.80, 95 % CI = 0.64–1.00) was inversely associated with walking at recommended levels (≥150 min/week). Higher-income areas (OR = 0.26, 95 % CI = 0.08–0.81), greater number of traffic lights (OR = 0.27, 95 % CI = 0.09–0.88), and higher land use mix (OR = 0.52, 95 % CI = 0.31–0.88) were inversely associated with cycling. The neighborhood built environment may affect active commuting among adults living in urban centers in middle-income countries.

Keywords

Motor activity Transportation Environment and public health Adult Brazil 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was funded through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention contract U48/DP000060-01 (Prevention Research Centers Program). Adriano Akira F. Hino had a fellowship from CAPES (DS—PROGRAMA DE DEMANDA SOCIAL). The authors are thankful for the contribution of the Institute of Urban Planning and Research of Curitiba (IPPUC).

References

  1. 1.
    Hamer M, Chida Y. Active commuting and cardiovascular risk: a meta-analytic review. Prev Med. 2008; 46(1): 9–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boone-Heinonen J, Evenson KR, Taber DR, Gordon-Larsen P. Walking for prevention of cardiovascular disease in men and women: a systematic review of observational studies. Obes Rev. 2009; 10(2): 204–217.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Giles-Corti B, Foster S, Shilton T, Falconer R. The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation. NSW Public Health Bull. 2010; 21(5–6): 122–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ogilvie D, Egan M, Hamilton V, Petticrew M. Promoting walking and cycling as an alternative to using cars: systematic review. BMJ. 2004; 329(7469): 763.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee C, Moudon AV. Physical activity and environment research in the health field: implications for urban and transportation planning practice and research. J Plan Lit. 2004; 19(2): 147–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD. Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann Behav Med. 2003; 25(2): 80–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dannenberg AL, Jackson RJ, Frumkin H, et al. The impact of community design and land-use choices on public health: a scientific research agenda. Am J Public Health. 2003; 93(9): 1500–1508.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Owen N, Humpel N, Leslie E, Bauman A, Sallis JF. Understanding environmental influences on walking: review and research agenda. Am J Prev Med. 2004; 27(1): 67–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wendel-Vos W, Droomers M, Kremers S, Brug J, van Lenthe F. Potential environmental determinants of physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Obes Rev. 2007; 8(5): 425–440.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saelens BE, Handy SL. Built environment correlates of walking: a review. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40(7S): S550–S566.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McCormack GR, Shiell A. In search of causality: a systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011; 8(1): 125.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, Wells JC, Loos RJ, Martin BW. Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet. 2012; 380(9838): 258–271.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cervero R, Sarmiento OL, Jacoby E, Gomez LF, Neiman A. Influences of built environments on walking and cycling: lessons from Bogotá. Int J Sust Transp. 2009; 3(4): 37–41.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gomez LF, Parra DC, Buchner D, et al. Built environment attributes and walking patterns among the elderly population in Bogota. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 38(6): 592–599.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Parra DC, Hoehner CM, Hallal PC, et al. Perceived environmental correlates of physical activity for leisure and transportation in Curitiba, Brazil. Prev Med. 2011;53:234–8.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salvador EP, Reis RS, Florindo AA. A prática de caminhada como forma de deslocamento e sua associação com a percepção do ambiente em idosos. Rev bras Ativ Fís Saúde. 2009; 14(3): 195–205.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salvador EP, Reis RS, Florindo AA. Practice of walking and its association with perceived environment among elderly Brazilians living in a region of low socioeconomic level. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010; 7: 67.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoehner CM, Brennan Ramirez LK, Elliott MB, Handy SL, Brownson RC. Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. Am J Prev Med. 2005; 28(2 Suppl 2): 105–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reis RS, Hallal PC, Parra DC, et al. Promoting physical activity through community-wide policies and planning: findings from Curitiba, Brazil. J Phys Act Health. 2010; 7(Suppl 2): S137–S145.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hino AA, Reis RS, Sarmiento OL, Parra DC, Brownson RC. The built environment and recreational physical activity among adults in Curitiba. Braz Prev Med. 2011; 52(6): 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reis RS, Hino AA, Parra DC, Hallal PC, Brownson RC. Bicycling and walking for transportation in three Brazilian cities. Am J Prev Med. 2013; 44(2): e9–e17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003; 35(8): 1381–1395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gomes GA, Reis RS, Parra DC, et al. Walking for leisure among adults from three Brazilian cities and its association with perceived environment attributes and personal factors. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011; 8: 111.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hallal PC, Gomez LF, Parra DC, et al. Lessons learned after 10 years of IPAQ use in Brazil and Colombia. J Phys Act Health. 2010; 7(Suppl 2): S259–S264.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wener RE, Evans GW. A morning stroll levels of physical activity in car and mass transit commuting. Environ Behav. 2007; 39(1): 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lachapelle U, Frank LD. Transit and health: mode of transport, employer-sponsored public transit pass programs, and physical activity. J Public Health Pol. 2009; 30(Suppl 1): S73–S94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dalton AM, Jones AP, Panter JR, Ogilvie D. Neighbourhood, route and workplace-related environmental characteristics predict adults' mode of travel to work. PLoS One. 2013; 8(6): e67575.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sallis JF, Conway TL, Dillon LI, et al. Environmental and demographic correlates of bicycling. Prev Med. 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.06.014
  30. 30.
    Beenackers MA, Foster S, Kamphuis CB, et al. Taking up cycling after residential relocation: built environment factors. Am J Prev Med. 2012; 42(6): 610–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Winters M, Brauer M, Setton EM, Teschke K. Built environment influences on healthy transportation choices: bicycling versus driving. J Urban Health. 2010; 87(6): 969–993.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Thornton LE, Pearce JR, Kavanagh AM. Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to assess the role of the built environment in influencing obesity: a glossary. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011; 8: 71.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Oliver LN, Schuurman N, Hall AW. Comparing circular and network buffers to examine the influence of land use on walking for leisure and errands. Int J Health Geogr. 2007; 6: 41.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leslie E, Coffee N, Frank L, Owen N, Bauman A, Hugo G. Walkability of local communities: using geographic information systems to objectively assess relevant environmental attributes. Health Place. 2007; 13(1): 111–122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
    Christian HE, Bull FC, Middleton NJ, et al. How important is the land use mix measure in understanding walking behaviour? Results from the RESIDE study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011; 8: 55.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Owen N, Cerin E, Leslie E, et al. Neighborhood walkability and the walking behavior of Australian adults. Am J Prev Med. 2007; 33(5): 387–395.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Reis RS, Hino AAF, Rech CR, Kerr J, Hallal PC. Walkability and physical activity: findings from Curitiba, Brazil. Am J Prev Med. 2013; 45(3): 269–275.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Van Dyck D, Cerin E, Conway TL, et al. Perceived neighborhood environmental attributes associated with adults' leisure-time physical activity: findings from Belgium, Australia and the USA. Health Place. 2013; 19: 59–68.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sallis JF, Bowles HR, Bauman A, et al. Neighborhood environments and physical activity among adults in 11 countries. Am J Prev Med. 2009; 36(6): 484–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gomez LF, Sarmiento OL, Parra DC, et al. Characteristics of the built environment associated with leisure-time physical activity among adults in Bogota, Colombia: a multilevel study. J Phys Act Health. 2010; 7(Suppl 2): S196–S203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Villanueva K, Giles-Corti B, McCormack G. Achieving 10,000 steps: a comparison of public transport users and drivers in a university setting. Prev Med. 2008; 47(3): 338–341.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    MacDonald JM, Stokes RJ, Cohen DA, Kofner A, Ridgeway GK. The effect of light rail transit on body mass index and physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 39(2): 105–112.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hidalgo D, Gutiérrez L. BRT and BHLS around the world: explosive growth, large positive impacts and many issues outstanding. Res Transp Econ. 2013; 39(1): 8–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Maas J, Verheij RA, Spreeuwenberg P, Groenewegen PP. Physical activity as a possible mechanism behind the relationship between green space and health: a multilevel analysis. BMC Public Health. 2008; 8: 206.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Garrard J, Rose G, Lo SK. Promoting transportation cycling for women: the role of bicycle infrastructure. Prev Med. 2008; 46(1): 55–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fraser SD, Lock K. Cycling for transport and public health: a systematic review of the effect of the environment on cycling. Eur J Public Health. 2011; 21(6): 738–743.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bacchieri G, Barros AJ. Traffic accidents in Brazil from 1998 to 2010: many changes and few effects. Rev Saude Publica. 2011; 45(5): 949–963.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chandran A, Kahn G, Sousa T, Pechansky F, Bishai DM, Hyder AA. Impact of road traffic deaths on expected years of life lost and reduction in life expectancy in Brazil. Demography. 2013;50:229–36.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    World Health Organization. Global status report on road safety: time for action. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Mascarenhas MDM, Silva MMA, Malta DC, et al. Atendimentos de emergência por acidentes na Rede de Vigilância de Violências e Acidentes—Brasil, 2006. Ciênc Saúde Colet. 2009; 14(5): 1657–1668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rech CR, Reis RS, Hino AA, et al. Neighborhood safety and physical inactivity in adults from Curitiba, Brazil. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012; 9(1): 72.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hallal PC, Reis RS, Parra DC, Hoehner CM. Association between perceived environmental attributes and physical activity among adults in Recife, Brazil. J Phys Act Health. 2010; 7(Suppl 2):S213–22.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Oyeyemi AL, Adegoke BO, Sallis JF, Oyeyemi AY, De Bourdeaudhuij I. Perceived crime and traffic safety is related to physical activity among adults in Nigeria. BMC Public Health. 2012; 12: 294.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Oyeyemi AL, Adegoke BO, Oyeyemi AY, Sallis JF. Perceived environmental correlates of physical activity and walking in African young adults. Am J Health Promot. 2011; 25(5): e10–e19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adriano A. F. Hino
    • 1
    • 2
    • 6
  • Rodrigo S. Reis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Olga L. Sarmiento
    • 3
  • Diana C. Parra
    • 4
  • Ross C. Brownson
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Research Group of Physical Activity and Quality of Life (GPAQ), School of Health and BiosciencesPontificia Universidade Católica do ParanáCuritibaBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Physical EducationUniversidade Federal do ParanáCuritibaBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Public Health, School of MedicineUniversidad de los AndesBogotaColombia
  4. 4.Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown SchoolWashington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA
  5. 5.Division of Public Health Sciences and Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, School of MedicineWashington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA
  6. 6.CuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations