Associations between the frequency of cycling and domains of quality of life.

ISSUE ADDRESSED This study examined the association between domains of quality of life (QoL) and the frequency of cycling by men and women. METHOD A cross-sectional survey of 846 healthy adults in Sydney, Australia measured cycling behaviour and self-reported QoL. Participants were aged 18-55 years and were living within 5km of the centre. Cycling frequency for all purposes was recorded as weekly, less than weekly or never cycling. QoL was measured using the four QoL domains of the WHOQOL-BREF: physical psychological, social and environment. Linear regression was used to assess the association between cycling and QoL. RESULTS Among men, at least weekly cycling was associated with physical QoL (P=0.002) and any cycling was positively associated with psychological wellbeing (at least weekly P=0.01, less than weekly P=0.01) after adjusting for age, education and income. No significant associations were observed for women. CONCLUSION Frequent cycling was associated with higher physical and psychological QoL in men, but not among women in this sample. No relationship was observed between cycling and the environment and social QoL domains. SO WHAT?: These findings suggest that cycling offers physical and psychological QoL benefits for men.

[1]  Lawrence D Frank,et al.  Environmental and demographic correlates of bicycling. , 2013, Preventive medicine.

[2]  Ronald C Plotnikoff,et al.  Physical activity level and health-related quality of life in the general adult population: a systematic review. , 2007, Preventive medicine.

[3]  R. Reis,et al.  Quality of life and physical activity among adults: population-based study in Brazilian adults , 2012, Quality of Life Research.

[4]  R. Meeusen,et al.  Cycling to work: influence on indexes of health in untrained men and women in Flanders. Coronary heart disease and quality of life , 2007, Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports.

[5]  Raymond W. Novaco,et al.  Technology and Psychological Well-being: Commuting and well-being , 2009 .

[6]  R. Meeusen,et al.  Determining the intensity and energy expenditure during commuter cycling , 2006, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[7]  Albert W. Wu,et al.  Do the SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF Measure the Same Constructs? Evidence from the Taiwan Population* , 2006, Quality of Life Research.

[8]  A. Bauman,et al.  Health benefits of cycling: a systematic review , 2011, Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports.

[9]  Ralph Buehler,et al.  Cycling for Everyone , 2008 .

[10]  G. Hawthorne,et al.  Interpreting the WHOQOL-Brèf: Preliminary Population Norms and Effect Sizes , 2006 .

[11]  Adrian E. Bauman,et al.  Driving: A Road to Unhealthy Lifestyles and Poor Health Outcomes , 2014, PloS one.

[12]  D. Thompson,et al.  Walking, cycling, and obesity rates in Europe, North America, and Australia. , 2008, Journal of physical activity & health.

[13]  Stephen Greaves,et al.  Evaluating the transport, health and economic impacts of new urban cycling infrastructure in Sydney, Australia – protocol paper , 2013, BMC Public Health.