Stephanie Williamson

Contribution of Public Parks to Physical Activity

OBJECTIVESnParks provide places for people to experience nature, engage in physical activity, and relax. We studied how residents in low-income, minority communities use public, urban neighborhood parks and how parks contribute to physical activity.nnnMETHODSnIn 8 public parks, we used direct observation to document the number, gender, race/ethnicity, age group, and activity level of park users 4 times per day, 7 days per week. We also interviewed 713 park users and 605 area residents living within 2 miles of each park.nnnRESULTSnOn average, over 2000 individuals were counted in each park, and about two thirds were sedentary when observed. More males than females used the parks, and males were twice as likely to be vigorously active. Interviewees identified the park as the most common place they exercised. Both park use and exercise levels of individuals were predicted by proximity of their residence to the park.nnnCONCLUSIONSnPublic parks are critical resources for physical activity in minority communities. Because residential proximity is strongly associated with physical activity and park use, the number and location of parks are currently insufficient to serve local populations well.

System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC): Reliability and Feasibility Measures.

BACKGROUNDnNew tools are needed to examine physical activity and the contexts in which it occurs. Community parks contribute to physical activity, but measuring activity and associated variables in them is challenging because area contexts change and the numbers and characteristics of users are highly variable.nnnMETHODSnWe developed SOPARC (System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities) and tested its use by observing 16,244 individuals in 165 park areas. Reliabilities included 472 simultaneous measures by independent observers.nnnRESULTSnCorrelations between observers on number of area participants was 0.99 for female and male park users. Reliabilities (i.e., percent agreement) for age (89%, females; 85%, males), race/ethnic (80%, females; 82%, males), and activity level (80%, females; 88%, males) groupings met acceptable criteria. Reliabilities for area contexts (i.e., usable, accessible, supervised, organized, equipped) exceeded 94%.nnnCONCLUSIONSnSOPARC is a reliable and feasible instrument for assessing physical activity and associated contextual data in community settings.

Physical activity in parks: A randomized controlled trial using community engagement.

BACKGROUNDnPhysical inactivity is an important health risk factor that could be addressed at the community level.nnnPURPOSEnThe goal of the study was to determine whether using a community-based participatory approach with park directors and park advisory boards (PABs) could increase physical activity in local parks. Whether involving PABs would be more effective than working with park directors alone was also tested.nnnDESIGNnAn RCT intervention from October 2007 to April 2012 was used, with partial blinding of observers to the condition. All data were analyzed in 2012.nnnSETTING/PARTICIPANTSnOf 183 eligible parks in the City of Los Angeles, 50 neighborhood park/recreation centers serving diverse populations participated. Parks were randomized to three study arms: (1) park-director intervention (PD-only); (2) PAB intervention (PAB/PD); and (3) a control arm. Physical activity in each park was systematically observed, and park users and residents living within 1 mile of the park were interviewed.nnnINTERVENTION(S)nThe intervention included assessing park use, obtaining feedback from park users and community residents, training on outreach and marketing, and giving each intervention park

Impact of Park Renovations on Park Use and Park-based Physical Activity

4000 to increase park-based physical activity. The PAB/PD arm required participation and concurrence on all purchases by the PAB.nnnMAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)nChange in the number of park users and change in the level of park-based physical activity, expressed as MET-hours.nnnRESULTSnRelative to control parks where physical activity declined, in both the PD-only and PAB/PD parks, physical activity increased, generating an estimated average of 600 more visits/week/park, and 1830 more MET-hours of physical activity/week/park. Both residents and park users in the intervention arms in the intervention arms reported increased frequency of exercise. No differences were noted between the PD-only and PAB/PD study arms.nnnCONCLUSIONSnProviding park directors and PABs with training on outreach and marketing, feedback on park users, and modest funds increased the amount of physical activity observed in parks.

The Potential for Pocket Parks to Increase Physical Activity

BACKGROUNDnGiven the concerns about low rates of physical activity among low-income minority youth, many community-based organizations are investing in the creation or renovation of public parks to encourage youth to become more physically active. To what degree park renovations accomplish this goal is not known.nnnMETHODSnWe used the System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) to measure park users and their physical activity levels before and after 2 parks were renovated. We compared findings with 4 parks: 2 that were unrenovated parks and 2 that were undergoing renovation. We also surveyed park users and local residents about their use of the parks.nnnRESULTSnCompared with parks that had not yet been renovated, the improved parks saw more than a doubling in the number of visitors and a substantial increase in energy expended in the parks. Increased park use was pronounced in adults and children, but was not seen in teens and seniors. Park renovations were associated with a significantly increased perception of park safety.nnnCONCLUSIONSnPark improvements can have a significant impact on increasing park use and local physical activity.

Validation of a New Counter for Direct Observation of Physical Activity in Parks

Purpose. To assess the use of new pocket parks in low-income neighborhoods. Design. The design of the study was a quasi-experimental post-test only comparison. Setting. Los Angeles, California, was the setting for the study. Subjects. Subjects were park users and residents living within .5 mile of three pocket parks and 15 neighborhood parks. Intervention. The creation of pocket parks. Measures. We used the System of Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) tool to measure park use and park-based physical activity, and then surveyed park users and residents about their park use. Analysis. We surveyed 392 and 432 household members within .5 mile of the three pocket parks before and after park construction, respectively, as well as 71 pocket park users, and compared them to 992 neighborhood park users and 342 residents living within .5 mile of other neighborhood parks. We compared pocket park use to playground area use in the larger neighborhood parks. We used descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations for the analysis. Results. Overall, pocket park use compared favorably in promoting moderate-to-vigorous physical activity with that of existing playground space in nearby parks, and they were cost-effective at

Increasing Physical Activity in Parks: Results of a Randomized Controlled Intervention Trial Using Community-Based Participatory Research

0.73/MET hour (metabolic equivalent hour) gained. Pocket park visitors walked an average of .25 miles to get to a park. Conclusions. Pocket parks, when perceived as attractive and safe destinations, may increase physical activity by encouraging families with children to walk there. Additional strategies and programs may be needed to encourage more residents to use these parks.

Physical Activity in Parks

PURPOSEnThis study aims to examine the reliability of a 12-button counter to simultaneously assess physical activity (PA) by age and gender subgroups in park settings.nnnMETHODSnA total of 1,160 pairs of observations were conducted in 481 target areas of 19 neighborhood parks in the great Los Angeles, California, area between June 2013 and March 2014. Interrater reliability was assessed by Pearsons correlation, intraclass correlation (ICC), and agreement probability in metabolic equivalents (METs). Cosine similarity was used to check the resemblance of distributions among age and gender categories. Pictures taken in a total of 112 target areas at the beginning of the observations were used as a second reliability check.nnnRESULTSnInterrater reliability was high for the total METs and METs in all age and gender categories (between 0.82 and 0.97), except for male seniors (correlations and ICC between 0.64 and 0.77, agreement probability 0.85 to 0.86). Reliability was higher for total METs than for METs spent in moderate-to-vigorous PA. Correlation and ICC between observers measurement and picture-based counts are also high (between 0.79 and 0.94).nnnCONCLUSIONnTrained observers can reliably use the 12-button counter to accurately assess PA distribution and disparities by age and gender.

Parks and Physical Activity

BACKGROUNDnPhysical inactivity is an important health risk factor that could be addressed at the community level.nnnPURPOSEnThe goal of the study was to determine whether using a community-based participatory approach with park directors and park advisory boards (PABs) could increase physical activity in local parks. Whether involving PABs would be more effective than working with park directors alone was also tested.nnnDESIGNnAn RCT intervention from October 2007 to April 2012 was used, with partial blinding of observers to the condition. All data were analyzed in 2012.nnnSETTING/PARTICIPANTSnOf 183 eligible parks in the City of Los Angeles, 50 neighborhood park/recreation centers serving diverse populations participated. Parks were randomized to three study arms: (1) park-director intervention (PD-only); (2) PAB intervention (PAB/PD); and (3) a control arm. Physical activity in each park was systematically observed, and park users and residents living within 1 mile of the park were interviewed.nnnINTERVENTION(S)nThe intervention included assessing park use, obtaining feedback from park users and community residents, training on outreach and marketing, and giving each intervention park

System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC)

4000 to increase park-based physical activity. The PAB/PD arm required participation and concurrence on all purchases by the PAB.nnnMAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)nChange in the number of park users and change in the level of park-based physical activity, expressed as MET-hours.nnnRESULTSnRelative to control parks where physical activity declined, in both the PD-only and PAB/PD parks, physical activity increased, generating an estimated average of 600 more visits/week/park, and 1830 more MET-hours of physical activity/week/park. Both residents and park users in the intervention arms in the intervention arms reported increased frequency of exercise. No differences were noted between the PD-only and PAB/PD study arms.nnnCONCLUSIONSnProviding park directors and PABs with training on outreach and marketing, feedback on park users, and modest funds increased the amount of physical activity observed in parks.