Premium
Active, healthy cities – how does population physical activity vary between Australian cities?
Author(s) -
Bauman Adrian,
Curac Nada,
King Lesley,
Venugopal Kamalesh,
Merom Dafna
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
health promotion journal of australia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.515
H-Index - 32
eISSN - 2201-1617
pISSN - 1036-1073
DOI - 10.1071/he12201
Subject(s) - recreation , population health , geography , physical activity , population , public health , logistic regression , gerontology , environmental health , demography , socioeconomics , medicine , sociology , political science , nursing , law , physical medicine and rehabilitation
Issue addressed Despite recognition that urban infrastructure influences physical activity, there have been no comparisons between Australian city‐level patterns of physical activity. This study ranked Australian cities in terms of adults' participation in leisure‐time physical activity and examined city‐level variations in activity trends between 2001 and 2009. Methods Data on participation in leisure‐time physical activity in adults (15 years) between 2001 and 2009 were obtained from the Exercise Recreation and Sport Survey (ERASS), a computer‐assisted telephone interview conducted to collect population‐level sport participation information by the Australian Sports Commission. Data were analysed for respondents residing in the eight capital cities of Australia. The prevalence of meeting recommended ‘health‐enhancing physical activity’ (HEPA) and levels of walking were calculated by age, gender and survey year. Multiple linear logistic regression analyses were used to compare cities. Results Pooled data from 174,323 adults across years showed that Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth and Canberra residents were significantly more active than Sydney, Adelaide and Hobart residents in terms of HEPA. Hobart, Perth and Melbourne residents were significantly more likely to walk 5 sessions a week compared with their counterparts in other cities. HEPA and walking increased across most cities between 2001 and 2009. Conclusion There are significant differences between Australian cities in physical activity and walking levels, over and above differences attributable to age, gender or educational levels. While this may be due to infrastructure differences, comparative information on indicators of the built environment and transport infrastructure are not available. So what? Healthy city indicators that compare urban infrastructure and urban policy could stimulate action for more conducive physical activity environments across Australian cities.