Association between daily physical activity and neighborhood environments

  • Kanae Kondo
  • Jung Su Lee
  • Kiyoshi Kawakubo
  • Yusuke Kataoka
  • Yasushi Asami
  • Katsumi Mori
  • Masahiro Umezaki
  • Taro Yamauchi
  • Hirofumi Takagi
  • Hiroshi Sunagawa
  • Akira Akabayashi
Regular Article

Abstract

Objective

Previous studies on the association between physical activity (PA) and neighborhood environments (NE) focused on either objectively measuring the NE or the residents’ perception of NE. Here, we investigate which actual or perceived NE is associated with residents’ PA in Japan.

Methods

Two regions with an objectively assessed high and low residential density, land use mix-diversity, and street connectivity, respectively, were identified in one city. The subjects were selected using a stratified random sampling method by sex and age in each region. The NE of the subjects was objectively measured using the Geographic Information System (GIS), and the subjects' perception of the NE was assessed using a questionnaire. The daily total number of walking steps was measured with an accelerometer, and walking and cycling time were assessed by a questionnaire.

Results

For the female subjects, the mean cycling time, subjectively assessed as a means of transport, was significantly longer in the group with a high GIS score for the number of land use types, while the score for total number of walking steps was significantly higher among those who were aware of places to walk to, and cycling time for transport was longer for those who perceived an accessibility to post offices, banks/credit unions, gymnasiums/fitness facilities, and amusement facilities in their neighborhood. For the male subjects, the score for walking time for leisure was longer for those who perceived aesthetics and an accessibility to parks, and the score for total walking steps was significantly higher for those who perceived an accessibility to bookstores or rental video stores in their neighborhood.

Conclusions

The results to this study demonstrate that daily PA was high among female subjects living in a NE with land use mix-diversity, and who had an awareness of places to walk to and the accessibility to facilities for daily necessities in their neighborhood. For male subjects, daily PA was high among those who perceived the aesthetics of and accessibility to facilities for pleasure in their neighborhood. Further research is needed to determine the association between PA and NE on the basis of sex differences.

Keywords

Geographical Information System (GIS) Neighborhood environment Perception of neighborhood environment Physical activity Sex differences 

References

  1. 1.
    Warburton DE, Nicol CW, Bredin SS. Health benefits of physical activity: the evidence. Can Med Assoc J. 2006;174(6):801–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andersen LB. Relative risk of mortality in the physically inactive is underestimated because of real changes in exposure level during follow-up. Am J Epidemiol. 2004;160(2):189–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schnohr P, Scharling H, Jensen JS. Changes in leisure-time physical activity and risk of death: an observational study of 7,000 men and women. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158(7):639–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kujala UM, Kaprio J, Sarna S, Koskenvuo M. Relationship of leisure-time physical activity and mortality: the Finnish twin cohort. JAMA. 1998;279(6):440–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ministry of Health, Welfare. The national nutrition survey in Japan in 1997 (in Japanese). Tokyo: Dai-ichi Shuppan Publishing; 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ministry of Health, Labour, Welfare. The national nutrition survey in Japan in 2004 (in Japanese). Tokyo: Dai-ichi Shuppan Publishing; 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: review and update. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(12):1996–2001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schmid TL, Pratt M, Howze E. Policy as intervention: environmental and policy approaches to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Am J Public Health. 1995;85(9):1207–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Duncan MJ, Spence JC, Mummery WK. Perceived environments and physical activity: a meta-analysis of selected environmental characteristics. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2005;5(2):11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Black JB, Chen D. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(9):1552–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Flank LD. Environment correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann Behav Med. 2003;25(2):80–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee JS, Kawakubo K, Kohri S, Tsujii H, Mori K, Akabayashi A. Association between residents’ perception of the neighborhood’s environments and walking time in objectively different regions. Environ Health Prev Med. 2006;12(1):3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee C, Moudon AV. Correlates of walking for transportation or recreation purposes. J Phys Act Health. 2006;3[Suppl 1]:S77–98.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Humpel N, Owen N, Iverson D, Lesie E, Bauman A. Perceived environment attributes, residential location, and walking for particular purpose. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26(2):119–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giles-Corti B, Donovan RJ. Socioeconomic status difference in recreational physical activity levels and real and perceived access to a supportive physical environment. Prev Med. 2002;35:601–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ward DS, Evenson KR, Vaughn A, Rodgers AB, Troiano RP. Accelerometer use in physical activity: best practice and research recommendations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37[Suppl 11]:S582–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cabinet Office Government of Japan. Public Opinion Polls on infrastructure development (in Japanese). Tokyo: Cabinet Office, Government of Japan; 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Frank LD, Schmid TL, Sallis JF, Chapman J, Saelens BE. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form, Findings from SMARTRAQ. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28[Suppl 2]:117–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harano M. Analysis of walking space around Kofu Station (in Japanese). Ann Hum Reg Geogr. 2007;29:51–61.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Statistical Bureau. Census of Japan 2(2). Tokyo: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication; 2001. (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zenrin. Zenrin home map (in Japanese). Tokyo: Zenrin; 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Japan Map Center. Digital map 25000 spatial framework (data file). Tokyo: Japan Map Center; 2006.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bureau of Urban Developments Tokyo Metropolitan Government. Land use in Tokyo: 23 wards of Tokyo in the thirteen years of the Heisei period (in Japanese). Tokyo: Bureau of Citizens and Culture; 2001.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cerin E, Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD. Neighborhood environment walkability scale: validity and development of a short form. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(9):1682–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schneider PL, Crouter SE, Lukajic O, Cassett DR. Accuracy and reliability of 10 pedometers for measuring steps over a 400-m walk. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(10):1779–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut M, Bassett DR. Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1455–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schmidt MD, Freedson PS, Pekow P, Roberts D, Sternfeld B, Chasan-Taber L. Validation of the Kaiser Physical Activity Survey in pregnant women. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38(1):42–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Masse LC, Fuemmeler BF, Anderson CB, Matthews CE, Trost SG, Cattellier DJ, et al. Accelerometer data reduction: a comparison of four reduction algorithms on select outcome variables. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37[Suppl 11]:S544–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1381–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee JS. Questionnaires of the assessment of daily physical activity (in Japanese). Nippon Rinsho. 2000;58[Suppl]:174–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Murase N, Katsumura T, Ueda C, Inoue S, Shimomitsu T. International standardization of physical activity (in Japanese). J Health Welf Stat. 2002;49(11):1–9.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hasegawa K. Research on the evaluation of aesthetics and effects of regulations to maintain aesthetics (in Japanese). Tokyo: Land Researcher Development Assistance Project of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport; 2004.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kaku K. Social relationship and mutual aid (in Japanese). Kanmon Regional Research. 2007;16:33–51.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Atkinson JL, Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Cain KL, Black JB. The association of neighborhood design and recreational environments with physical activity. Am J Health Promot. 2005;19(4):304–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ieda J, Oka N. City reproduction (in Japanese). Tokyo: Gakugei Shuppannsha; 2002.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society for Hygiene 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kanae Kondo
    • 1
  • Jung Su Lee
    • 1
  • Kiyoshi Kawakubo
    • 2
  • Yusuke Kataoka
    • 3
  • Yasushi Asami
    • 3
  • Katsumi Mori
    • 1
  • Masahiro Umezaki
    • 4
  • Taro Yamauchi
    • 5
  • Hirofumi Takagi
    • 6
  • Hiroshi Sunagawa
    • 7
  • Akira Akabayashi
    • 8
  1. 1.Department of Health Promotion Science, Graduate School of MedicineThe University of TokyoBunkyo-kuJapan
  2. 2.Department of Food Sciences and NutritionKyoritsu Women’s UniversityTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Center for Spatial Information SciencesThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  4. 4.Department of Human Ecology, Graduate School of MedicineThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan
  5. 5.Department of Human Ecology, Graduate School of MedicineHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan
  6. 6.School of Nursing, Faculty of MedicineToho UniversityTokyoJapan
  7. 7.Hagi Center for Health and WelfareHagiJapan
  8. 8.Department of Biomedical Ethics, Graduate School of MedicineThe University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations