Brookfield, K; Fitzsimons, C; Scott, I; Mead, G; Starr, J; Thin, N; Tinker, A and Ward Thompson, C (2015) The home as enabler of more active lifestyles among older people. Building Research & Information, 43(5), pp. 616-630. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
Inactive lifestyles have negative health consequences, while time spent sedentary (sitting and lying) is related to morbidity and premature mortality. Older adults often form the most sedentary segment of the population. Much of this behaviour may be practised at home where this group can spend extended periods. Physical activity rates among older adults are particularly low. Even household physical activities can be beneficial for this group, while they can constitute much of an older person's total activity. Despite this context, the home's role in the active and sedentary behaviours of the older population appears critically understudied. Using interview and focus group data collected from 22 older adults (healthy volunteers, stroke survivors and people with dementia), this paper begins to address this issue. Aspects of the home that aid or impede a more active, less sedentary lifestyle are identified with three presenting particular capacity in this respect discussed: steps, space within the home, and the location and form of facilities, fixtures and fittings. The crucial role health status plays in structuring this capacity is identified. Simple design recommendations, devised to support older people to lead more active lives at home, are presented.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | active design; active living; age; built environment; design characteristics; home; housing; older adults; physical activity; sedentary behaviour |
| Index terms: | mortality, physical activity, older people, population, household, sedentary behaviour, built environment, housing, dementia, interview, focus group, active design, volunteer, lifestyle |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, demography, health conditions and diseases, practitioner, health behaviours and lifestyles, construction type, data collection methods, user focus, health monitoring assessment and metrics |
| Topics: | Design Practice, Urban Studies, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Health and Safety, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here