Benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity for people with somatic or mental diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the benefits and harms of structured outdoor physical activity (PA) for people living with one or more somatic or mental diseases. METHODS: We identified articles from inception until Marts 2023 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL and citation tracking in Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining structured outdoor PA reporting physical function, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), pain or mental outcomes. We used random-effect meta-analyses and investigated heterogeneity in subgroups, sensitivity and meta-regression analyses. Observational studies and studies with insufficient data were summarized narratively. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE. RESULTS: From 4098 hits, 20 studies (19 RCTs and 1 cohort) were included (n: 1759 participants). Studies varied in type of disease and intervention. End of intervention results suggested a small effect on HRQOL (k = 10, SMD = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.19 to 0.71) and physical function (k = 14, SMD = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.13 to 0.64), while effects were moderate on mental outcomes (k = 13, SMD = -0.52, 95%CI: -0.82 to -0.23) favoring the outdoor intervention over comparators (no intervention, usual care, indoor PA or outdoor intervention without exercise). We were not able to conclude on outdoor interventions' effect on pain. Four studies reported adverse events including non-serious (pain, falls, fatigue) and serious (hospitalization, pneumonia). Certainty of evidence was overall very low. CONCLUSION: Structured outdoor PA may improve HRQOL and physical function, as well as mental health outcomes. The very low certainty of evidence calls for high quality RCTs to determine benefits and harms of structured outdoor PA.

Post-Occupancy Evaluation of a Crisis Shelter Garden and Application of Findings Through the Use of a Participatory Design Process.

OBJECTIVE: This study concerned optimization of an evidence-based crisis shelter garden as a setting for everyday activities and nature-based therapy. The study hereby tested the design guidelines that the garden is based on. BACKGROUND: Design guidelines for gardens intended to support health are becoming increasingly specialized, targeting different user groups. This study contributes to the knowledge concerning health-supporting garden design at crisis shelters for women and children who are exposed to domestic violence. METHOD: The study included a post-occupancy evaluation (POE) consisting of landscape analyses, observation of physical traces, and interviews as well as a subsequent participatory design process. RESULTS: The landscape analyses and the observation of physical traces indicated a minimal level of maintenance and recurrent use being limited to a few areas of the garden. The interviews added nuance and new issues to these results, resulting in the following themes: maintenance, accessibility, safety, therapeutic setting and free space, many ways to play, and social and private spheres. The participatory design process led to an optimization of the garden, including changes to its physical design related to making the garden safer, positively distractive, and more versatile in terms of activities. Improvements were also made regarding policy for use, maintenance, and informing users. CONCLUSION: The design guidelines were tested, and the evidence was strengthened, adding nuance and new issues to consider during further development of the guidelines. Both the POE and the participatory design process were confirmed as crucial aspects of evidence-based health design.

Health-Promoting Nature Access for People with Mobility Impairments: A Systematic Review.

This study systematically evaluated the scientific evidence for health benefits of natural environments for people with mobility impairments. Literature searches based on five categories of terms-target group, nature type, health-related impacts, nature-related activities and accessibility issues-were conducted in four databases (Web of Science, Scopus, CAB ABSTRACT and Medline). Twenty-seven articles from 4196 hits were included in the systematic reviews. We concluded that people with mobility disabilities could gain different health benefits, including physical health benefits, mental health benefits and social health benefits from nature in different kinds of nature contacts ranging from passive contact, active involvement to rehabilitative interventions. Several issues related to the accessibility and use of nature for people with mobility impairments need attention from professionals such as landscape architects, rehabilitative therapists, caregivers and policy makers. The overall quality of methodology of the included studies is not high based on assessment of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Moreover, more randomized controlled trials and longitudinal studies that focus specifically on evidence-based health design of nature for people with mobility impairments in the future are needed.