Leisure activities and mobility device use among very old people in Latvia and in Sweden

Abstract

Introduction

Opportunities for leisure activities and physical mobility are important for the ageing population. Therefore, we aim to describe leisure activities outside the home among very old (over 80 years of age) users and non-users of mobility devices in two European countries.

Method

Survey data on mobility device use, self-rated physical mobility and leisure activities outside the home were utilised for a Latvian (n = 225) and Swedish (n = 314) sample. Differences in type and number of leisure activities were studied between the countries and for four groups of participants according to use/non-use of and level of physical mobility.

Results

Significant differences in type and number of leisure activities were seen between the national samples and among the participant groups. In general, each participant group in the Swedish sample reported more leisure activities than did those in the Latvian sample. Non-users with good physical mobility reported significantly more leisure activities than all other participant groups.

Conclusion

There are differences between the two national contexts in the type and number of leisure activities reported. To support very old people’s participation in outdoor leisure activities, we need more knowledge as to how physical, institutional and sociocultural environments affect very old people’s opportunities to engage in and perform such activities.

Keywords

Activity and participation ageing population assistive technology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agahi

Ahacic

Parker

(2006) Continuity of leisure participation from middle age to old age. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences 61(6): 340–346.

Altman

(1999) Practical Statistics for Medical Research, London: Chapman & Hall.

Beard

Bloom

(2015) Towards a comprehensive public health response to population ageing. Lancet 385(385): 658–661.

Brandt

Iwarsson

Ståhl

(2003) Satisfaction with rollators among community-living users: A follow-up study. Disability & Rehabilitation 25(7): 343–353.

Brännström

Backman

Santamaki Fischer

(2013) Walking on the edge: Meanings of living in an ageing body and using a walker in everyday life ‒ A phenomenological hermeneutic study. International Journal of Older People Nursing 8(2): 116–122.

Bryant

Pourmoghaddam

Thrasher

(2012) Gait changes with walking devices in persons with Parkinson’s disease. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 7(2): 149–152.

Dahlin-Ivanoff

Sonn

(2005) Changes in the use of assistive devices among 90-year-old persons. Aging Clinical Experimental Research 17(3): 246–251.

Eccles

Clarke

Livingstone

(1998) North of England evidence based guidelines development project: Guideline for the primary care management of dementia. British Medical Journal 317(7161): 802–808.

Estreen M (2010) Europe with free choice of assistive technology: The provision of assistive devices in specific European countries. Vällingby: Swedish Institute of Assistive Technology.

10.

Finlayson

Peterson

Asano

(2014) A cross-sectional study examining multiple mobility device use and fall status among middle-aged and older adults with multiple sclerosis. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 9(1): 12–16.

11.

Gagliardi

Spazzafumo

Marcellini

(2007) The outdoor mobility and leisure activities of older people in five European countries. Ageing and Society 27(5): 683–700.

12.

Gramstad

Storli

Hamran

(2013) ‘Do I need it? Do I really need it?’ Elderly people’s experiences of unmet assistive technology device needs. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 8(4): 287–293.

13.

Häggblom-Kronlöf

Sonn

(2007) Use of assistive devices ‒ a reality full of contradictions in elderly persons’ everyday life. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 2(6): 335–345.

14.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2002) (2002) Technical Aids for Persons with Disabilities ‒ Classification and Terminology, Genova: ISO Copyright Office.

15.

Iwarsson

Slaug

(2001) The Housing Enabler: An Instrument for Assessing and Analysing Accessibility Problems in Housing, Lund: Veten & Skapen & Slaug Data Management.

16.

Iwarsson

Ståhl

Löfqvist

(2013) Mobility in outdoor environments in old age. In: Rowles

Bernard

(eds) Environmental Gerontology, New York: Springer Publishing Company, pp. 175–198.

17.

Iwarsson

Wahl

Nygren

(2007) Importance of the home environment for healthy aging: Conceptual and methodological background of the European ENABLE-AGE Project. Gerontologist 47(1): 78–84.

18.

Kielhofner

(2008) Model of Human Occupation: Theory and Application, Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

19.

Kylberg

Löfqvist

Tomsone

(2015) A European perspective on the service delivery systems for assistive technology – Comparing differences and similarities between Latvia and Sweden. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 30(1): 51–67.

20.

Löfqvist

Nygren

Brandt

(2007) Use of mobility devices and changes over 12 months among very old people in five European countries. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 19(6): 497–505.

21.

Löfqvist C, Slaug B, Ekström H, et al. (2016) Use, non-use and perceived unmet needs of assistive technology among Swedish people in the third age. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 11(3); 195–201.

22.

Löfqvist

Nygren

Széman

(2005) Assistive devices among very old people in five European countries. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 12(4): 181–192.

23.

Menec

(2003) The relation between everyday activities and successful aging: A 6-year longitudinal study. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological and Social Sciences 58(2): 74–82.

24.

Nilsson

Lundgren

Liljequist

(2011) Occupational well-being among the very old. Journal of Occupational Science 19(2): 115–126.

25.

Ripat

Booth

(2005) Characteristics of assistive technology service delivery models: Stakeholder perspectives and preferences. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 27(24): 1461–1470.

26.

Ripat

Woodgate

(2011) The intersection of culture, disability and assistive technology. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 6(2): 87–96.

27.

Salminen

Brandt

Samuelsson

(2009) Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: A systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 41(9): 697–706.

28.

Satariano

Guralnik

Jackson

(2012) Mobility and aging: New directions for public health action. American Journal of Public Health 102(8): 1508–1515.

29.

Silverstein

Parker

(2002) Leisure activities and quality of life among the oldest old in Sweden. Research on Aging 24(25): 528–547.

30.

Spiliotopoulou

Fowkes

Atwal

(2012) Assistive technology and prediction of happiness in people with post-polio syndrome. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 7(3): 199–204.

31.

Toepoel

(2013) Ageing, leisure and social connectedness: How could leisure help reduce social isolation of older people? Social Indicators Research 113(1): 355–372.

32.

Townsend

Polatajko

(2007) Enabling Occupation II: Advancing an Occupational Therapy Vision for Health, Well-being, & Justice through Occupation, Ottawa: CAOT Publications ACE.

33.

Ware

Snow

Kosinski

(1993) SF-36 ® Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide, Boston, MA: New England Medical Center, The Health Institute.

34.

Webber

Porter

Menec

(2010) Mobility in older adults: A comprehensive framework. Gerontologist 50(4): 443–450.

35.

World Health Organization (2002) Active Ageing – A Policy Framework, a Contribution to the World Health Organization to the Second United Nations World Assembly on Ageing, Madrid, Spain. Geneva: Author.

36.

Zaidi

Stanton

(2014) Active Ageing Index 2014: Analytical Report, Brussels: UNECE/European Commission.