The Urban Built Environment and Mobility in Older Adults: A Comprehensive Review

Table 1

Details of reviewed articles of built environment characteristics and mobility in those aged 60 years and older.

							Associations^b
Reference	Sample Size	Location	Age range or mean (SD)	Neighborhood definition; (n units)	Built environment measures^a	Outcomes	Expected direction	Unexpected direction	Null
Beard et al., 2009 [40]	937,857	New York, New York	65+	Census tracts (2,138)	Mixed land use	Disability			X
					Neighborhood decay	Disability			X
					Through routes	Disability			X
					Poor street characteristics	Disability	X
Berke et al., 2007 [35]	1967	Seattle, Washington	65–97	100, 500, or 1000 meters from homes	Walkability index including residential and commercial density	Walking	X^d
Brown et al., 2008 [26]	273	Miami, Florida	Mean = 78.5 (NR)	Participant’s block	Front entrance characteristics^c	Physical functioning after 24 months	X
Clarke & George, 2005 [39]	4154	North Carolina	Mean = 73.55 (6.72)	Census tracts (95)	Housing density	Disability	X^e
					Land use diversity		X^e
Clarke et al., 2009 [25]	1821	USA	Results for: 65–74 and 75+	Census tracts (1821)	Population density	Increase in walking difficulty over 15 years			X
					Non-automobile commuters		X^f
Fisher et al., 2004 [34]	582	Portland, Oregon	64–94; Mean = 73.99 (6.25)	City defined neighborhoods (56)	Parks	Walking	X
Frank et al., 2010 [3]	1970	Atlanta, Georgia	65+	1 kilometer from homes	Walkability index including land use mix, residential density and street connectivity	Walking	X
Gomez et al., 2010 [29]	1886	Bogotá, Columbia	60–98; Mean= 70.7 (7.7)	Researcher defined by SES (50)	Lives in weekend pedestrian-only corridor	Walking	X
					Transit stops				X
					Parks				X
					Connectivity			X
Hall & McAuley, 2010 [38]	128	Illinois	Mean = 69.8 (5.89)	1 kilometer from homes	Paths	Walking	X
					Parks				X
					Recreation areas				X
					Exercise/gym facilities				X
					Schools				X
King, 2008 [36]	190	Denver, Colorado	Mean = 74.2 (5.8)	City defined neighborhoods (8)	Sidewalk functionality^c	Walking			X
					Safety from traffic^c		X
					Aesthetics^c		X
					Destinations^c				X
Lee et al., 2009 [27]	4997	USA	Mean=70 (NR)	County (448)	Sprawl	Walking—cross-sectional analysis	X
						Increase in walking over 5 years			X
Li et al., 2005 [33]	582	Portland, Oregon	Mean = 74 (6.3)	City defined neighborhoods (56)	Residential households	Walking	X
					Places of employment		X
					Street intersections		X
					Green space and recreational facilities		X
Michael et al., 2006 [32]	105	Portland, Oregon	Mean = 75.1 (6.3)	City defined neighborhoods (10)	Shopping mall	Walking	X
					Trails				X
					Sidewalk presence^c				X
					Sidewalk condition^c				X
					Graffiti/vandalism^c				X
Michael et al., 2010 [28]	422	Portland, Oregon	Median = 74	1/8, 1/4, and 1/2 mile from homes	Parks	Increase in walking over 3–6 year follow-up	X^g
					Trails		X^g
					Recreational facilities				X
Nagel et al., 2008 [31]	546	Portland, Oregon	Mean = 74.5 (6.3)	1/4 or 1/2 mile from homes	Automobile traffic volume	Walking		X
					Sidewalk coverage				X
					Intersection frequency				X
					Public transportation access				X
					Retail establishments		X
					Park/green space				X
Patterson & Chapman, 2004 [30]	133	Portland, Oregon	70–92	Census tract (6)	New Urbanism Index including mix use, connectivity and aesthetics	Walking	X
Satariano et al., 2010 [37]	884	4 USA locations^h	65+	Within 400 meters of homes	Common destinations	Walking			X
					Street connectivity				X
					Commercial/mixed use neighborhood			X

^aFrom administrative databases unless otherwise indicated.
^bFrom fully adjusted models when multiple results provided.
^cFrom rater assessments.
^dAmong those living in same residence for ≥2 years, positive association was found only among women.
^ePositive association was found only among those with lower body impairments.
^fPositive association was found only among those aged 75 and older.
^gPositive association was found only among those in high socioeconomic neighborhoods.
^hLocations include Alameda County, CA; Allegheny County, PA; Cook County, IL; and Wake and Durham Counties, NC.
NR: not reported.