Emily N. Ussery

Walking for Transportation or Leisure Among U.S. Women and Men — National Health Interview Survey, 2005–2015

Physical activity confers considerable health benefits, but only half of U.S. adults report participating in levels of aerobic physical activity consistent with guidelines (1,2). Step It Up! The Surgeon Generals Call to Action to Promote Walking and Walkable Communities identified walking as an important public health strategy to increase physical activity levels (3). A previous report showed that the self-reported prevalence of walking for transportation or leisure increased by 6 percentage points from 2005 to 2010 (4), but it is unknown whether this increase has been sustained. CDC analyzed National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2005 (26,551 respondents), 2010 (23,313), and 2015 (28,877) to evaluate trends in the age-adjusted prevalence of self-reported walking among adults aged ≥18 years. The prevalence of walking increased steadily among women, from 57.3% in 2005, to 62.5% in 2010, and to 65.1% in 2015 (significant linear trend). Among men, a significant linear increase in reported walking was observed, from 54.3% in 2005, to 61.8% in 2010, and to 62.8% in 2015, although the increase stalled between 2010 and 2015 (significant linear and quadratic trends). Community design policies and practices that encourage pedestrian activity and programs tailored to the needs of specific population subgroups remain important strategies for promoting walking (3).

Environmental Supports for Physical Activity, National Health Interview Survey–2015

INTRODUCTION The Guide to Community Preventive Services recommends combined built environment approaches to increase physical activity, including new or enhanced transportation infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks) and land use and environmental design interventions (e.g., close proximity of local destinations). The aim of this brief report is to provide nationally representative estimates of two types of built environment supports for physical activity: near-home walkable infrastructure and destinations, from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey. METHODS Adults (n=30,453) reported the near-home presence of walkable transportation infrastructure (roads, sidewalks, paths, or trails where you can walk; and whether most streets have sidewalks) and four walkable destination types (shops, stores, or markets; bus or transit stops; movies, libraries, or churches; and places that help you relax, clear your mind, and reduce stress). The prevalence of each, and the count of destination types, was calculated (in 2017) and stratified by demographic characteristics. RESULTS Overall, 85.1% reported roads, sidewalks, paths, or trails on which to walk, and 62.6% reported sidewalks on most streets. Among destinations, 71.8% reported walkable places to relax; followed by shops (58.0%); transit stops (53.2%); and movies, libraries, or churches (47.5%). For most design elements, prevalence was similar among adults aged 18-24 and 25-34 years, but decreased with age >35 years. Adults in the South reported a lower prevalence of all elements compared with those in other Census regions. CONCLUSIONS Many U.S. adults report walkable built environment elements near their home; future efforts might target areas with many older adult residents or those living in the South.

The National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network Access to Parks Indicator: A National County-Level Measure of Park Proximity

Parks and recreation departments and public health organizations both work to improve the well-being of their communities. Measuring residential proximity to parks could be a specific area of shared interest, given that proximity to parks is needed for walking access, and the use of parks is, in turn, associated with many physical, social, and mental health benefits. The CDCs publicly available National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network (NEPHTN) Access to Parks Indicator (API) focuses on one major component of access, residential proximity to parks. The API uses a commercial parks database and U.S. Census data to estimate the number and percentage of individuals in the U.S. that live within a half-mile of a park boundary, a measure commonly used to represent park proximity. The API is calculated at the state and county levels and is available for all states and counties in the U.S. Using estimates from the API, we examined the distribution of residential proximity to parks by geography and race/ethnicity. Additionally, we evaluated differences in park proximity by rural/urban status of counties. In 2010, 39% of the total U.S. population lived within a half-mile of a park. This percentage varied widely between states, ranging from 9% in West Virginia to 67% in Hawaii and 88% in the District of Columbia (DC). Park proximity was lowest among non-Hispanic whites (34.2%) and highest among individuals belonging to the non-Hispanic other race category (52.0%). Metropolitan counties had the highest percentage of residents living within a half-mile of a park (43.3%); the percentage was lower in non-metropolitan counties adjacent to a metropolitan county (15.0%) and non-metropolitan counties not adjacent to a metropolitan county (18.5%). Park proximity was higher in metropolitan counties with a larger population size and in non-metropolitan counties with a higher degree of urbanization. The NEPHTN Access to Parks Indicator provides an opportunity to understand park proximity in counties and states throughout the U.S., including identifying disparities that may exist between population subgroups and comparing geographic areas. Parks and recreational professionals can use this information to compare their county or state to other geographic areas and, in combination with local data on parks within their jurisdiction, inform decisions to improve the distribution of parks and the well-being of their communities.

Racial and ethnic differences in perceived safety barriers to walking, United States National Health Interview Survey – 2015

Barriers to safe walking may prevent people from being physically active, and previous reports have identified differences in barriers to safe walking across racial and ethnic groups. The purpose of this research was to determine the role demographic characteristics play on racial/ethnic differences in perceived barriers to safe walking and determine if racial/ethnic differences vary by urban/rural residence and Census region. Participants in the 2015 National Health Interview Survey Cancer Control Supplement (n = 31,433 adults ≥18 years) reported perceived barriers to safe walking (traffic, crime, and animals) and demographic characteristics. Urban/rural residence and Census region were based on home addresses. We calculated adjusted prevalence of barriers by race/ethnicity using logistic regression; geographic differences in barriers across racial/ethnic groups were examined via interaction terms. After adjustment for demographic characteristics, non-Hispanic blacks (blacks) and Hispanics reported crime and animals as barriers more frequently than non-Hispanic whites (whites) (crime: blacks, 22.2%; Hispanics, 16.7%; whites, 9.0%; animals: blacks, 18.0%; Hispanics, 12.4%; whites, 8.5%). Racial/ethnic differences in perceived crime as a barrier were more pronounced in the Northeast and Midwest than in the South and West. Urban-dwelling blacks (all regions) and Hispanics (Midwest and South) reported animals as barriers more frequently than whites. Racial/ethnic differences in perceived barriers to safe walking remained after adjusting for demographic characteristics and varied by geographic location. Addressing perceived crime and animals as barriers to walking could help reduce racial/ethnic differences in physical activity, and several barriers may need to be assessed to account for geographic variation.

Association Between Walkable Community Design Features and Walking AmongU.S. Adults — 2015: 1676 Board #2 May 31 3

1676 Board #2 May 31 3:15 PM 5:15 PM Association Between Walkable Community Design Features and Walking AmongU.S. Adults — 2015 Geoffrey Whitfield, Susan Carlson, Emily Ussery, Kathleen Watson, David Berrigan, Janet Fulton, FACSM. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. (Sponsor: Janet Fulton, FACSM) (No relevant relationships reported)

Community and Street-Scale Supports for Walking in the US Virgin Islands Before the 2017 Hurricanes

Objectives To determine the prevalence of community and street-scale design features that promote walking across the US Virgin Islands (USVI). Methods In May 2016, the USVI Department of Health, with technical assistance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, conducted a territory-wide audit with a validated tool. We selected street segments (n = 1114) via a 2-stage sampling method, and estimates were weighted to be representative of publicly accessible street length. Results Overall, 10.7% of the street length contained a transit stop, 11.3% had sidewalks, 21.7% had at least 1 destination (e.g., stores, restaurants), 27.4% had a traffic calming feature (e.g., speed humps), and 53.2% had at least some street lighting. Several features were less prevalent on residential streets compared with commercial streets, including transit stops, sidewalks, destinations, and street lighting (P < .01). Conclusions Across the USVI, community and street-scale features supportive of walking were uncommon. Improving community and street-scale design in the USVI, particularly in residential areas, could increase physical activity by enhancing walkability and therefore improve public health. These data can be used to inform community planning in the USVI.

Geographic and Urban–Rural Differences in Walking for Leisure and Transportation

INTRODUCTION Walking can serve many purposes, such as transportation (to get some place) or leisure (for fun, relaxation, or exercise); therefore, it provides many opportunities for people to be physically active. This study examines geographic and urban-rural differences in walking in the U.S. METHODS Adult respondents (aged ≥18 years) to the 2015 National Health Interview Survey reported participation in and time spent (minutes per week) walking for transportation and leisure in the past week. In 2017, prevalence and time spent walking (among walkers) for any, leisure, and transportation walking were estimated by nine expanded regions and urban-rural designation. RESULTS Prevalence of any walking ranged from 50.8% (East South Central) to 72.4% (Pacific); for leisure walking 43.9% (East South Central) to 60.6% (Pacific); and transportation walking 17.8% (East South Central) to 43.5% (New England). Among walkers, mean minutes spent walking per week ranged from 77.4 (East South Central) to 101.6 (Pacific); for leisure walking 70.5 (West South Central) to 85.9 (Mountain); and for transportation walking 47.4 (East South Central) to 66.4 (Middle Atlantic). Overall, there were urban-rural differences in prevalence of walking; however, differences depended on walking purpose and expanded region. Time spent walking was similar in urban and rural areas. CONCLUSIONS Regional differences in walking prevalence and time spent walking exist. Urban-rural differences in prevalence of walking differ based on region and purpose; however, rural areas had a lower prevalence of walking than urban areas regardless of purpose in southern regions. Opportunities exist to improve walking, particularly among southern regions with a focus on rural areas.

Transportation and Leisure Walking Among U.S. Adults: Trends in Reported Prevalence and Volume, National Health Interview Survey 2005–2015

INTRODUCTION Promotion of walking is a promising strategy for increasing physical activity levels in the U.S. The proportion of adults who report walking for either transportation or leisure has increased in recent years, but evidence on trends in walking for specific purposes is limited. METHODS The 2005, 2010, and 2015 National Health Interview Survey assessed self-reported participation in and volume (minutes/week) of walking for transportation and leisure in the past week among adults aged ≥18 years. Linear and quadratic trends in the prevalence and mean volume of walking for each purpose were evaluated using logistic and linear regression. Analyses were performed in 2017. RESULTS The prevalence of transportation walking increased from 28.4% (2005) to 31.7% (2015) (linear trend: p<0.05). Leisure walking prevalence increased from 42.1% (2005) to 52.1% (2015), but the increased stalled from 2010 to 2015 with only a 2.3 percentage point increase (linear and quadratic trends: p<0.05). Across purposes, the mean walking volume decreased from 2005 to 2015, with no significant changes between 2010 and 2015 (linear and quadratic trends: p<0.05). The proportion of adults who walked for both transportation and leisure in the past week increased steadily (linear trend: p<0.05), and this group reported the greatest total volume of walking. CONCLUSIONS Although the prevalence of self-reported transportation and leisure walking increased during the last decade, the time spent walking decreased. Strategies that encourage walking for multiple purposes may present an opportunity for increasing both participation in walking and the amount of time spent walking.