ABSTRACT
Background: Maintaining mobility is fundamental to active aging, allowing older adults to lead dynamic and independent lives. The perception of mobility among older adults significantly impacts their overall well-being and quality of life. Given the aging population, mobility has become an increasingly pressing issue. Aim: This study focused on the perception of urban neighborhoods, including considerations of urban tissue (crossings and sidewalk maintenance), urban scenes (benches and traffic), and safety (fears and street lighting quality). We investigated the differences in the perception of the surroundings of residences by urban and rural seniors concerning their demographic and social characteristics and environmental determinants. Methods: A quantitative study design utilizing a questionnaire survey was employed. Data were collected mainly through face-to-face interviews in the field (PAPI) and via an online questionnaire (CAWI). The final sample comprised 525 participants. Hypotheses regarding the influence of gender, age, social status, level of physical activity, degree of urbanization, and region on environmental perception were tested using ordinal regression. Results: The hypothesis regarding the dependence of the perception of the surroundings on the level of urbanization was confirmed; that regarding the dependence of the perception of the residence surroundings on seniors' age was not confirmed. The other hypotheses were partially confirmed. For the seven investigated environmental attributes, gender was significant in two cases, social status and physical activity in three cases, and region in four cases. Conclusion: While most studies have focused on urban settings, this study highlights the situation in rural municipalities. Substantially worse pedestrian conditions in availability of pedestrian crossings, benches, and lighting were recognized in rural municipalities versus cities. Understanding the complexity of mobility and the spatial locations relevant for older persons concerning potential barriers and facilitators for mobility aids in planning and adapting neighborhood environments to promote active and healthy aging in place.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Attention is focused on the health and physical fitness of older adults due to their increasing age. Maintaining physical abilities, including safe walking and movement, significantly contributes to the perception of health in old age. One of the early signs of declining fitness in older adults is limited mobility. Approximately one third of 70-year-olds and most 80-year-olds report restrictions on mobility in their apartments and immediate surroundings. Restriction or loss of mobility is a complex multifactorial process, which makes older adults prone to falls, injuries, and hospitalizations and worsens their quality of life while increasing overall mortality. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to identify the factors that have had a significant impact on mobility in recent years and currently, and to identify gaps in our understanding of these factors. The study aims to highlight areas where further research is needed and where new and effective solutions are required. METHODS: The PRISMA methodology was used to conduct a scoping review in the Scopus and Web of Science databases. Papers published from 2007 to 2021 were searched in November 2021. Of these, 52 papers were selected from the initial 788 outputs for the final analysis. RESULTS: The final selected papers were analyzed, and the key determinants were found to be environmental, physical, cognitive, and psychosocial, which confirms the findings of previous studies. One new determinant is technological. New and effective solutions lie in understanding the interactions between different determinants of mobility, addressing environmental factors, and exploring opportunities in the context of emerging technologies, such as the integration of smart home technologies, design of accessible and age-friendly public spaces, development of policies and regulations, and exploration of innovative financing models to support the integration of assistive technologies into the lives of seniors. CONCLUSION: For an effective and comprehensive solution to support senior mobility, the determinants cannot be solved separately. Physical, cognitive, psychosocial, and technological determinants can often be perceived as the cause/motivation for mobility. Further research on these determinants can help to arrive at solutions for environmental determinants, which, in turn, will help improve mobility. Future studies should investigate financial aspects, especially since many technological solutions are expensive and not commonly available, which limits their use.
