Physical Activity Resource and User Characteristics in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (Recursos para la actividad física y características de los usuarios en Puerto Vallarta, México)

Abstract . Physical activity resources (PARs) are valuable settings for physical activity (PA) in Latin countries. PAR quality, amenities, and features are strongly associated with PA. However, the relationship between PAR characteristics and PAR usege has not been investigated in Mexico. This study aimed to describe and evaluate PARs and their association with PAR users and determine whether user and PAR characteristics differed by resource type, proximity to the ocean, or neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) status in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. Assessed PARs (N=8) included parks (N=5), a freestanding plaza (N=1), and plazas combined with a park (N=2).The Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA ©2010) was used to evaluate PAR amenities, features, and incivilities. The PARA was adapted to include plazas and open green spaces to reflect cultural and land use differences in Mexico. The System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) was used to code the age, gender, and ethnicity of each user. Descriptive analyses were used to describe PARs and users. Correlations among PAR characteristics and users were investigated. T-tests and one-way ANOVAs were used to determine whether PAR and user characteristics differed by PAR type. All PARs were accessible, free for use, about the size of a city block, and were on average, 1.9 kilometers from the water (SD=1.3, Range=.1-3.2).  PARs had an average of 4.4 amenities (SD=1.6), 2.5 features (SD=1.4), and 3.5 incivilities (SD=2.1). The quality of amenities (Range=0-39, M=11.0, SD=4.8) and features (Range=0-36, M=6.4, SD=3.6) was low, and severity of incivilities was high (Range=0-36, M=29.9, SD=4.1).  Eighty-one users (60.5% men) were observed, with plazas attracting more users (m=38.0) than parks (m=6.8) or combination resources (m=4.5). PAR users were mostly adults (59.2%), with some children (28.4%) and few adolescents (12.4%). The quality of amenities was correlated with the total number of users (r=.74, p=.04). There were no differences in count or quality of amenities, features, or incivilities (ps>.05) by resource type. The plaza attracted more women compared to parks and combination resources (F=15.84, df=2.5, p=.01). More adolescents (F=7.29, df=2.5, p=.03) and adults (F=14.64, df=2.5, p=.01) were observed at the plaza compared to the parks or combination resources. PARs were highly accessible, yet the presence and quality of amenities and features was poor and incivilities were high. Parks were most common; however, the plaza attracted the most users, including women, teens, and adults. Findings indicate that increasing the quality of amenities may be an effective strategy for promoting PA. Poor quality of amenities and features may have limited the ability to detect associations with users. Resumen . Antecedentes: Los recursos de actividad fisica (RsAF) son ambitos de valor para la actividad fisica (AF) en los paises latinos. La calidad, comodidades y caracteristicas de los RAF estan fuertemente asociadas con la AF. Sin embargo, la relacion entre las caracteristicas y el uso de los RAF no se han investigado en Mexico. Objetivo: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo describir y evaluar los RAF y su asociacion con los usuarios de los RAF, y determinar si los usuarios y las caracteristicas de los RAF difieren por tipo de recurso, la proximidad al mar, o el nivel socioeconomico del vecindario, en el estado de Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. Metodos: Los RsAF fueron evaluados (N = 8) incluyendo parques (N = 5), una plaza independiente (N = 1), y plazas combinadas con un parque (N = 2). La Evaluacion de los Recursos de Actividad fisica (PARA © 2010) fue usada para evaluar las comodidades, las caracteristicas y los actos incivicos de los RAF. El PARA fue adaptado para incluir plazas y espacios verdes para reflejar las diferencias culturales y el uso de la tierra en Mexico. El Sistema de Observacion de Juego y Recreacion en Comunidades (SOPARC) se utilizo para codificar la edad, el genero y la etnia de cada usuario. Los analisis descriptivos fueron usados para describir los RsAF y los usuarios. Se investigaron las correlaciones entre los usuarios y las caracteristicas de los RAF. Se utilizaron Pruebas T y un ANOVAs unidireccional para determinar si las caracteristicas del usuario y las caracteristicas de los RAF diferian segun el tipo de RAF. Resultados: Todos los RAF eran accesibles, gratis para su uso, aproximadamente del tamano de una manzana de la ciudad, y estaban, de promedio, a 1,9 km del agua (SD = 1.3, rango = .1-3.2). Los RAF tenian una media de 4.4 instalaciones (SD = 1.6), 2.5 caracteristicas (SD = 1.4) y 3.5 actos incivicos (DE = 2.1). La calidad de las instalaciones (Rango = 0-39, M = 11.0, SD = 4.8) y caracteristicas (rango = 0-36, M = 6.4, SD = 3.6) fueron bajas, y la gravedad de los actos incivicos fue alta (gama = 0- 36, M = 29,9, SD = 4.1). Ochenta y un usuarios (60.5% varones) fueron observados, las plazas atraen a mas usuarios (m = 38.0) que los parques (m = 6.8) o recursos combinados (m = 4.5). Los usuarios de los RAF eran en su mayoria adultos (59.2%) con algunos ninos (28.4%) y pocos adolescentes (12.4%). El numero total de usuarios se correlaciono con la calidad de las instalaciones (r = 0,74, p = 0,04). No hubo diferencias en el recuento o la calidad de las instalaciones, caracteristicas o actos incivicos (p> .05) por tipo de recurso. La plaza atrajo a mas mujeres en comparacion con los parques y los recursos combinados (F = 15,84, df = 2,5; p = 0,01). Mas adolescentes (F = 7.29, df = 2.5; p = 3.) y adultos (F = 14.64, df = 2.5; p = .01) se observaron en la plaza frente a los parques o recursos combinados. Conclusiones: Los RAF eran muy accesibles, sin embargo, la presencia y calidad de instalaciones y servicios fue deficiente y los actos incivicos eran altos. Los parques fueron mas comunes; sin embargo, la plaza atrajo la mayor cantidad de usuarios, incluidas las mujeres, adolescentes y adultos. Los resultados indican que el aumento de la calidad de las instalaciones puede ser una estrategia eficaz para promover la AF. La mala calidad de las instalaciones y servicios puede haber limitado la capacidad de detectar asociaciones con los usuarios.

[1]  L. Cuevas-Nasu,et al.  Obesity, overweight, screen time and physical activity in Mexican adolescents. , 2009, Salud publica de Mexico.

[2]  Alejandra Jáuregui,et al.  The physical activity level of Mexican children decreases upon entry to elementary school. , 2011, Salud publica de Mexico.

[3]  B. Thompson,et al.  Rural Latino Youth Park Use: Characteristics, Park Amenities, and Physical Activity , 2011, Journal of Community Health.

[4]  Juan Pablo Gutiérrez,et al.  [National Health and Nutrition Survey 2012: design and coverage]. , 2013, Salud publica de Mexico.

[5]  J. Buehler.  CDC's vision for public health surveillance in the 21st century. Introduction. , 2012, MMWR supplements.

[6]  J. Salmon,et al.  Where do children usually play? A qualitative study of parents' perceptions of influences on children's active free-play. , 2006, Health & place.

[7]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Income Differences in Perceived Neighborhood Environment Characteristics Among African American Women , 2012, Environmental Health Insights.

[8]  E. J. Ulloa,et al.  The Relation between Aerobic Fitness, Muscular Fitness, and Obesity in Children from Three Countries at Different Stages of the Physical Activity Transition , 2013, ISRN obesity.

[9]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Resources for physical activity participation: Does availability and accessibility differ by neighborhood socioeconomic status? , 2003, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[10]  J. Banda,et al.  Physical activity opportunities in low socioeconomic status neighbourhoods , 2009, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[11]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Using the RE-AIM framework to evaluate physical activity public health programs in México , 2015, BMC Public Health.

[12]  L. Epstein,et al.  Reducing Sedentary Behavior , 2006, Psychological science.

[13]  Brian E Saelens,et al.  Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks. , 2008, American journal of public health.

[14]  D. Roe,et al.  Effectiveness of the Pasos Adelante Chronic Disease Prevention and Control Program in a US-Mexico Border Community, 2005-2008 , 2011, Preventing chronic disease.

[15]  Christine M. Hoehner,et al.  Assessing physical activity in public parks in Brazil using systematic observation. , 2010, American journal of public health.

[16]  Rebecca E Lee,et al.  The Physical Activity Resource Assessment (PARA) instrument: Evaluating features, amenities and incivilities of physical activity resources in urban neighborhoods , 2005, The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity.

[17]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  The concordance of directly and indirectly measured built environment attributes and physical activity adoption , 2011, The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity.

[18]  Takemi Sugiyama,et al.  Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces. , 2010, American journal of public health.

[19]  Daniela Golinelli,et al.  System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC): Reliability and Feasibility Measures. , 2006, Journal of physical activity & health.

[20]  B. Giles-Corti,et al.  A natural experiment to examine the impact of park renewal on park-use and park-based physical activity in a disadvantaged neighbourhood: the REVAMP study methods , 2014, BMC Public Health.

[21]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Contribution of neighbourhood socioeconomic status and physical activity resources to physical activity among women , 2007, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[22]  J Aaron Hipp,et al.  Ciclovía initiatives: engaging communities, partners, and policy makers along the route to success. , 2013, Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMP.

[23]  Claudia Nieto,et al.  Dietary and physical activity/inactivity factors associated with obesity in school-aged children. , 2012, Advances in nutrition.

[24]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Striding Toward Social Justice: The Ecologic Milieuof Physical Activity , 2009, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[25]  S. Barquera,et al.  Obesity prevalence in Mexico: impact on health and economic burden , 2013, Public Health Nutrition.

[26]  A. Flack,et al.  Places to Play: Association of Park Space and Facilities with Healthy Weight Status among Children , 2008, Journal of Community Health.

[27]  Rajiv Bhatia,et al.  Impact of park renovations on park use and park-based physical activity. , 2015, Journal of physical activity & health.

[28]  A. Kaczynski,et al.  Exploring the Distribution of Park Availability, Features, and Quality Across Kansas City, Missouri by Income and Race/Ethnicity: an Environmental Justice Investigation , 2013, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[29]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Physical activity promotion in Latin American populations: a systematic review on issues of internal and external validity , 2014, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[30]  S. Blair,et al.  Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy , 2012, BDJ.

[31]  S. Philippou.  Ancient Origins of the Mexican Plaza: From Primordial Sea to Public Space , 2014 .

[32]  J. Sallis,et al.  Children’s physical activity and parents’ perception of the neighborhood environment: neighborhood impact on kids study , 2013, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[33]  Christine M. Hoehner,et al.  Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. , 2005, American journal of preventive medicine.

[34]  Rebecca E. Lee,et al.  Researching Those Who Have the Most to Gain: Focused Physical Activity Promotion in Lower Socioeconomic Populations , 2012, Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports.