Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:19:35.446Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of high-rise residence on physical activity and quality of life among older people with leprosy in a retirement community

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 August 2012

SHUN PING CHENG ,
TZE FANG WANG ,
FU IN TANG ,
NGOK KIU CHU  and
I JU CHEN
SHUN PING CHENG
Affiliation:
Chi-Shan Hospital, Department of Health, Executive Yuan, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.
TZE FANG WANG
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
FU IN TANG
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
NGOK KIU CHU
Affiliation:
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
I JU CHEN*
Affiliation:
School of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan.
*
Address for correspondence: I Ju Chen, School of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan. E-mail: ijchen@ym.edu.tw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The significant time older people typically spend at home affects both their level of physical activity and quality of life. This prospective cohort study was designed to identify the effects that living in a high-rise residence retirement community has on physical activity and quality of life in older people with leprosy. The relocation group was comprised of study participants who had relocated voluntarily to a high-rise apartment building. The comparison group was comprised of study participants who had chosen not to relocate to that building. Data were collected using a personal information survey, Modified Baecke's Questionnaire, and the brief version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL-BREF). The groups were significantly similar in terms of household activities, leisure time activities, total physical activity score, and quality of life physical and social aspects, and significantly different in terms of quality of life overall (F=7.864, p=0.006), psychological (F=5.403, p=0.021) and environmental (F=23.099, p=0.000) aspects. This study indicates that living in a high-rise apartment environment does not decrease physical activity and may promote overall quality of life, and psychological and environmental aspects, in retirement community residents. The findings enhance understanding of the effect of different living environments on physical activity and quality of life. Greater health professional participation in retirement community design to ensure such designs facilitate residents’ health and quality of life is recommended.

Keywords

high-rise residencesenior housingphysical activityquality of life
Type
Articles
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 90 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aberg, A. C. 2008. Care recipients’ perceptions of activity related life space and life satisfaction during and after geriatric rehabilitation. Quality of Life Research, 17, 4, 509–20.Google Scholar
Adams, S. 2008. What role for housing in health and social care provision. Journal of Integrated Care, 16, 5, 30–6.Google Scholar
Benjamin, K., Edwards, N. and Caswell, W. 2009. Factors influencing the physical activity of older adults in long-term care: administrators’ perspectives. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 17, 2, 181–95.Google Scholar
Calkins, M. P. 2009. Evidence-based long term care design. NeuroRehabilitation, 25, 2, 145–54.Google Scholar
Chen, I. J. 2006. Models of physical activity, functional fitness, and fall among older adults in Taipei. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Chen, S. M. 2005. Research for use characteristics of community care facilities for the elder in high rise apartment buildings – a case of Zhang Rong community in Tainan, Taiwan. Unpublished masters thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Cheng, S. P., Tsai, T. I., Lii, Y. K., Yu, S., Cho, C. L. and Chen, I. J. 2009. The effects of a 12-week walking program on community-dwelling elderly adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 80, 3, 524–32.Google Scholar
Choi, J. S. 2004. Evaluating of community planning and life of senior cohousing projects in Northern European countries. European Planning Studies, 12, 8, 1189–216.Google Scholar
Crans, G. and Young, C. 2005. The role of design in inhibiting or promoting use of common open space: the case of Redwood Gardens, Berkeley, CA. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 19, 3/4, 71–93.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, K., Pieterse, M. and Pruyn, A. 2006. Physical environmental stimuli that turn healthcare facilities into healing environments through psychologically mediated effects: systematic review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56, 2, 166–81.Google Scholar
Francis, T. M. 1992. Environmental Psychology. Brooks/Cole Pacific, Grove, California.Google Scholar
Gardner, I. L., Browning, C. and Kendig, H. 2005. Accommodation options in later life: retirement village or community living? Australasian Journal on Ageing, 24, 4, 188–95.Google Scholar
Heywood, F. and Turner, L. 2007. Better Outcomes, Lower Costs: Implications for Health and Social Care Budgets of Investment in Housing Adaptations, Improvements and Equipment: A Review of the Evidence. Office for Disability Issues and University of Bristol, London.Google Scholar
Jacobs, D. E., Wilson, J., Dixon, S. L., Smith, J. and Evens, A. 2009. The relationship of housing and population health: a 30-year retrospective analysis. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117, 4, 597–604.Google Scholar
Joines, S. 2009. Enhancing quality of life through universal design. NeuroRehabilitation, 25, 2, 155–67.Google Scholar
Joseph, A. 2006. Health Promotion by Design in Long-term Care Settings. The Center for Health Design, Concord, New Hampshire.Google Scholar
Joseph, A., Zimring, C., Harris-Kojetin, L. and Kiefer, K. 2005. Presence and visibility of outdoor and indoor physical activity features and participation in physical activity among older adults in retirement communities. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 19, 3/4, 141–65.Google Scholar
Kyle, T. and Dunn, J. R. 2008. Effects of housing circumstances on health, quality of life and healthcare use for people with severe mental illness: a review. Health and Social Care in the Community, 16, 1, 1–15.Google Scholar
Lawton, M. P. 1989. Three functions of the residential environment. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 5, 1, 35–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, G. C. S. 2007. Reproducing spaces of Chinese urbanization: new city-based and land-centered urban transformation. Urban Studies, 44, 9, 1827–55.Google Scholar
Liu, L. W. and Kwan, H. S. 2001. A network approach to the design of residential institutions for the elderly. Journal of Contemporary Social Work, 82, 4, 56–92.Google Scholar
McDowell, I. and Newell, C. 1996. Physical disability and handicap. In McDowell, I. and Newell, C. (eds), Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaire. Oxford University Press, New York, 47–121.Google Scholar
National Center for Healthy Housing 2009. Housing Interventions and Health: A Review of the Evidence. National Center for Healthy Housing, Columbia, Maryland.Google Scholar
Nishita, C. M. and Pynoos, J. 2005. Retrofitting homes and buildings: improving sites for long-term-care delivery. Generations, Winter, 52–7.Google Scholar
Peel, C., Baker, P. S., Brown, C. J., Bodner, E. V. and Allman, R. M. 2005. Assessing mobility in older adults: the UAB study of aging life-space assessment. Physical Therapy, 85, 10, 1008–19.Google Scholar
Regnier, V. and Denton, A. 2009. Ten new and emerging trends in residential group living environments. NeuroRehabilitation, 25, 2, 169–88.Google Scholar
Safran-Norton, C. E. 2010. Physical home environment as a determinant of aging in place for different types of elderly households. Journal of Housing for the Elderly, 24, 2, 208–31.Google Scholar
Sheppard, L. 2009. Privacy within aged care facilities. Internet Journal of Advanced Nursing Practice, 10, 2.Google Scholar
Torrington, J. 2006. What has architecture got to do with dementia care? Quality in Ageing: Policy, Practice and Research, 7, 1, 34–48.Google Scholar
Tung, S. S. 2003. The research of the public space of a single veterans dormitory from the viewpoint of environmental behavior – a case study of a single veterans dormitory in Taipei. Unpublished masters thesis, Chung Yuan Christian University, Chung Li, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Ulrich, R. 1992. How design impacts wellness. The Healthcare Forum Journal, 35, 5, 20–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Ulrich, R. 2006. Essay: evidence-based health-care architecture. Lancet, 368, S1, 538–9.Google Scholar
Wahl, H. W. and Weisman, G. D. 2003. Environmental gerontology at the beginning of the new millennium: reflections on its historical, empirical, and theoretical development. The Gerontologist, 43, 5, 616–26.Google Scholar
Washburn, R. A. 2000. Assessment of physical activity in older adults. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 2, 79–88.Google Scholar
World Health Organization 2006. Report of the WHO Technical Meeting on Quantifying Disease from Inadequate Housing (November 28–30, 2005). World Health Organization, European Centre for Environment and Health, Bonn (Germany) Office, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Wu, L. L., Cheng, S. P., Lee, N. S. and Chen, I. J. 2010. Activity of daily living and life quality of patients with Hansen's disease in Taiwan. The Journal of Nursing, 57, 5, 57–69.Google Scholar
Yao, G., Chung, C. W., Yu, C. F. and Wang, J. D. 2002. Development and verification of reliability and validity of the WHOQOL-BREF Taiwan version. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 101, 5, 342–51.Google Scholar