Dataset Information

Good places for ageing in place: development of objective built environment measures for investigating links with older people's wellbeing.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is renewed interest in the role of the built environment in public health. Relatively little research to date investigates its impact on healthy ageing. Ageing in place has been adopted as a key strategy for coping with the challenges of longevity. What is needed is a better understanding of how individual characteristics of older people's residential environments (from front door to wider neighbourhood) contribute to their wellbeing, in order to provide the basis for evidence-based housing/urban design and development of interventions. This research aimed to develop a tool to objectively measure a large range of built environment characteristics, as the basis for a preliminary study of potential relationships with a number of 'place-related' functional, emotional and social wellbeing constructs.

Methods

Through a review of urban design literature, design documents, and existing measures, a new tool, the NeDeCC (Neighbourhood Design Characteristics Checklist) was developed. It was piloted, refined, and its reliability validated through inter-rater tests. A range of place-related wellbeing constructs were identified and measured through interviews with 200 older people living in a wide variety of rural-urban environments and different types of housing in England. The NeDeCC was used to measure the residential environment of each participant, and significant bivariate relationships with wellbeing variables were identified.

Results

The NeDeCC was found to have convincing face and construct validity and good inter-rater and test/retest reliability, though it would benefit from use of digital data sources such as Google Earth to eliminate the need for on-site survey. The significant relationships found in the study suggest that there may be characteristics of residential environments of potential relevance for older people's lives that have been overlooked in research to date, and that it may be worthwhile to question some of the assumptions about where and how older people want to live (e.g. villages seem to be positive). They also point to the importance of considering non-linear relationships.

Conclusions

The NeDeCC provides the basis for generation of evidence-based design guidance if it is used in prospective controlled studies or 'natural experiments' in the future. Ultimately, this will facilitate the creation of better places for ageing in place.

SUBMITTER: Burton EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3214925 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Loneliness in later life is largely presented as a problem of the individual focusing upon antecedents such as demographic or health factors. Research examining the role of the broader living environments is much rarer. We examined the relationship between loneliness and three dimensions of the lived environment: geographical region, deprivation, and area classification (urban or rural). METHODS:Our sample consisted of 4663 core members (44% males) aged 50+ (wave 7 mean age 72.8, S.D.?=?7.1) present both in waves 3 (2006) and 7 (2014) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Loneliness was measured using two approaches, individual and area-based, and both waves included these questions. Individual-based (self-reported) loneliness was assessed using the three item University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) scale (ranging from 3?=?not lonely to 9?=?lonely) with a score of 6+ defining loneliness. We also used a novel question which asked participants to evaluate how often they felt lonely in their area of residence (area-based; ranging from 1?=?often to 7?=?never, using cut off 4+ to define loneliness). The lived environment was classified in three different ways: the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), Government Office Regions (GOR), and area classification (urban or rural). Covariates with established relationship with loneliness including demographic factors, social engagement and health, were included in the analyses. RESULTS:In wave 7, the prevalence of individual-based loneliness was 18% and area-based was 25%. There was limited congruence between measures: 68% participants reported no individual- or area-based loneliness and 9% reported loneliness for both measures. After adjusting for individual co-variates only one significant relationship was observed between loneliness and area -based characteristics. A significant association was observed between area-based loneliness and deprivation score, with higher levels of loneliness in more deprived areas (OR?=?1.4 for highest quintile of deprivation). CONCLUSIONS:Our results indicate that loneliness in older adults is higher in the most deprived areas independent of individual-level factors. In order to develop appropriate interventions further research is required to investigate how area-level factors combine with individual-level loneliness vulnerability measures to generate increased levels of loneliness in deprived areas.

Project description:Subjective wellbeing and health are closely linked to age. Three aspects of subjective wellbeing can be distinguished-evaluative wellbeing (or life satisfaction), hedonic wellbeing (feelings of happiness, sadness, anger, stress, and pain), and eudemonic wellbeing (sense of purpose and meaning in life). We review recent advances in the specialty of psychological wellbeing, and present new analyses about the pattern of wellbeing across ages and the association between wellbeing and survival at older ages. The Gallup World Poll, a continuing survey in more than 160 countries, shows a U-shaped relation between evaluative wellbeing and age in high-income, English speaking countries, with the lowest levels of wellbeing in ages 45-54 years. But this pattern is not universal. For example, respondents from the former Soviet Union and eastern Europe show a large progressive reduction in wellbeing with age, respondents from Latin America also shows decreased wellbeing with age, whereas wellbeing in sub-Saharan Africa shows little change with age. The relation between physical health and subjective wellbeing is bidirectional. Older people with illnesses such as coronary heart disease, arthritis, and chronic lung disease show both increased levels of depressed mood and impaired hedonic and eudemonic wellbeing. Wellbeing might also have a protective role in health maintenance. In an analysis of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we identify that eudemonic wellbeing is associated with increased survival; 29·3% of people in the lowest wellbeing quartile died during the average follow-up period of 8·5 years compared with 9·3% of those in the highest quartile. Associations were independent of age, sex, demographic factors, and baseline mental and physical health. We conclude that the wellbeing of elderly people is an important objective for both economic and health policy. Present psychological and economic theories do not adequately account for the variations in patterns of wellbeing with age across different parts of the world. The apparent association between wellbeing and survival is consistent with a protective role of high wellbeing, but alternative explanations cannot be ruled out at this stage.

Project description:BackgroundPrevious research has examined individual-level and place characteristics as correlates of subjective wellbeing, with many studies concluding that individual factors (e.g. health, finances) are more strongly related to wellbeing. However, this 'dualistic' approach has been challenged, with some arguing that it is impossible to disentangle the effects of the two domains, and that wellbeing should be considered as part of a network of mutually reinforcing relationships between individual, community and place characteristics. We used network analysis to explore these complex associations.MethodsData were from a large sample of adults from a socioeconomically disadvantaged region of the United Kingdom (N = 4319). Wellbeing was assessed using the 7-item version of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS). Mixed graphical networks were estimated including wellbeing, place and individual-characteristic variables as nodes.ResultsWe found a densely connected network in which wellbeing was associated, both directly and indirectly, with all of the individual, community and place characteristics assessed. Wellbeing was most strongly connected with individual characteristics, in particular financial difficulty and subjective physical health. However, controlling for all other variables in the network model, wellbeing was positively associated with local greenspace usage, civic agency, and neighbourhood cohesion, and negatively associated with housing disrepair. Greater specificity in these associations was observed when the wellbeing construct was broken down into its constituent parts.ConclusionsThese findings highlight the complex relationships that exist between individual, community and place characteristics in the context of subjective wellbeing, and that all domains need to be considered when developing population-level strategies to improve wellbeing. Further consideration needs to be given to how this might happen in practice, for example through a combination of consistent use of community engagement methodologies alongside Health in All Policy (HiAP) approaches.

Project description:BackgroundHousing is a social determinant of health. Extensive research has highlighted its adverse effects on health. However, less is known about the effects of cohousing typology on health, which has the potential to create lively social networks and healthy communities and environments. We report the findings of a scoping study designed to gather and synthesise all known evidence on the relationship between cohousing and wellbeing and health.MethodUsing the scoping review method, we conducted a literature review in PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct and JSTOR in May 2019 and selected articles published from 1960 onwards, with no geographical limit and no design restrictions. Retrieved articles underwent three sequential screening phases. The results were described through a narrative synthesis of the evidence.ResultsOf the 2560 articles identified, we selected 25 full-text articles analysing 77 experiences. All of them were conducted in high-income countries. Ten studies analysed the impact of cohousing on physical and mental health or quality of life and wellbeing. Eight of the 10 studies found a positive association. In addition, 22 studies analysed one or more psychosocial determinants of health (such as social support, sense of community and physical, emotional and economic security) and most found a positive association. Through these determinants, quality of life, wellbeing and health could be improved. However, the quality of the evidence was low.DiscussionThe cohousing model could enhance health and wellbeing mediated by psychosocial determinants of health. However, extreme caution should be exercised in drawing any conclusions due to the dearth of data identified and the designs used in the included studies, with most being cross-sectional or qualitative studies, which precluded causal-based interpretations. Because housing is a major social determinant of health, more evidence is needed on the impact of this model on health through both psychosocial and material pathways.