Objective evaluation of architectural obstacles encountered in two Canadian urban settings by mobility device users

Authors

  • Stéphanie Gamache Center for interdisciplinary research in rehabilitation and social integration CIUSSS de la Capitale Nationale Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec And Department of rehabilitation, Université Laval
  • Francois Routhier Center for interdisciplinary research in rehabilitation and social integration CIUSSS de la Capitale Nationale Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec And Department of rehabilitation, Université Laval
  • W. Ben Mortenson Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. AND Rehabilitation Research Program at GF Strong University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • William C Miller Rehabilitation Research Program, Vancouver Costal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. AND Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  • Kathleen A Martin Ginis School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v10i1.186

Keywords:

mobility limitation, environmental barriers, social participation

Abstract

Individuals using ambulation or wheeled assistive technologies encounter obstacles when accessing built environments. Although there are many environmental evaluations allowing the identification of these obstacles, very few take into consideration both outdoor and indoor environments. Since we know little about the environments of individuals with mobility impairments regarding their mobility assistive technologies (MAT) and mobility in general, the aim of the project was to objectively describe environmental obstacles encountered by mobility device users in two Canadian urban settings. Locations to be evaluated were nominated by community dwelling MAT users during focus groups in Quebec City (n=25 participants) and community forums in the Vancouver region (n=30-45). The measure of environmental accessibility (MEA) was used to evaluate the outdoor and indoor identified barriers. Relevant MEA sections were completed based on problems that were noted by MAT users, and non-compliant items were recorded. Nineteen locations (buildings and exterior spaces) in Quebec City and 20 in the Vancouver region were evaluated. Fifteen MEA sections were used in Quebec City and 12 in the Vancouver region (out of 29): curb ramps; sidewalk; parking; outdoor signage; doors; accessible routes; walls; obstacles; access ramps; handrails and guardrails; elevators; equipment (automatic teller machine); locker rooms; toilet, changing and shower stalls; and washrooms. Non-compliant items were similar in Quebec City and the Vancouver region. The most frequently encountered ones were similar in both locations. The most problematic MEA sections (with more non-compliant items) were access ramps and washrooms. This study provides a better understanding of the objective characteristics of outdoor and indoor environments impeding access among mobility device users, and consequently, the elements which should be considered for improvement.

Author Biographies

Stéphanie Gamache, Center for interdisciplinary research in rehabilitation and social integration CIUSSS de la Capitale Nationale Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec And Department of rehabilitation, Université Laval

PhD candidate in experimental medicine

Francois Routhier, Center for interdisciplinary research in rehabilitation and social integration CIUSSS de la Capitale Nationale Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique de Québec And Department of rehabilitation, Université Laval

Associate professor, department of rehabilitation

W. Ben Mortenson, Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. AND Rehabilitation Research Program at GF Strong University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy

William C Miller, Rehabilitation Research Program, Vancouver Costal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. AND Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Professor, Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy and Associate Dean, Health Profession

Kathleen A Martin Ginis, School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada.

Founding Director of SCI Action Canada

References

Americans with disabilities act [ADA]. (1995). ADA accessibility checklist for existing facilities. Retrieved 2010-09-28, from www.ada.gov/racheck.pdf

Americans with disabilities act [ADA]. (2001). ADA checklist for new lodging facilities. from www.ada.gov/hsurvey.htm#anchor96917

Avis, A. H., Card, J. A., & Cole, S. T. (2005). Accessibility and attitudinal barriers encountered by travelers with physical disabilities. Tourism Review International, 8(3), 239-248.

Barker, D. J., Reid, D., & Cott, C. (2006). The experience of senior stroke survivors: factors in community participation among wheelchair users. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73(1), 18-25.

Bateni, H., & Maki, B. E. (2005). Assistive devices for balance and mobility: benefits, demands, and adverse consequences. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 86(1), 134-145.

Bennett, S., Kirby, R. L., & Macdonald, B. (2009). Wheelchair accessibility: descriptive survey of curb ramps in an urban area. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 4(1), 17-23.

Bizier, C., Fawcett, G., & Gilbert.S. (2012). Canadian survey on disability 2012: Mobility disabilities among Canadians aged 15 years and older, 2012. from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-654-x/89-654-x2016005-eng.htm

Brandt, A., Iwarsson, S., & Stahle, A. (2004). Older people's use of powered wheelchairs for activity and participation. . Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 36(2), 70-77.

Canadian Heritage Parks Canada. (1994). Design guidelines for accessible outdoor recreation facilities.

Charette, C., Best, K. L., Smith, E. M., Miller, W. C., & Routhier, F. (2018). Walking Aid Use in Canada: Prevalence and Demographic Characteristics Among Community-Dwelling Users. Phys Ther, 98(7), 571-577.

Clarke, P. J., Ailshire, J. A., Nieuwenhuijsen, E. R., & Vrankrijker, M. W. (2011). Participation among adults with disability: The role of the urban environment. Social Science & Medicine, 72(10), 1674-1684.

Don MacDowall of Bass International Consulting for People Outdoors. (2004). Accessibility checklist – a self-assessment tool. Retrieved 2010-09-28, from www.auscamps.asn.au/accessibility/docs/FullAccessibility_Checklist.pdf

Dos Santos, L. N., & de Carvalho, R. J. (2012). Ergonomics and accessibility for people with visual impairment in hotels. Work, 41 Suppl 1, 1417-1424.

Fomiatti, R., Richmond, J., Moir, L., & Millsteed, J. (2013). A systematic review of the impact of powered mobility devices on older adults' activity engagement. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics, 31(4), 297-309.

Gamache, S., Morales, E., Noreau, L., Dumont, I., & Leblond, J. (2018). Measure of Environmental Accessibility (MEA): Development and inter-rater reliability. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 8(1), 1-31.

Gamache, S., Morales, E., Noreau, L., Dumont, I., & Leblond, J. (to be published in 2018). Measure of Environmental Accessibility (MEA). from https://www.ciusss-capitalenationale.gouv.qc.ca/publications

Gamache, S., Vincent, C., Routhier, F., McFadyen, B. J., Beauregard, L., & Fiset, D. (2016). Development of a measure of accessibility to urban infrastructures: a content validity study. Medical Research Archives, 4(5), 1-25.

Giesbrecht, E. M., Ripat, J. D., Cooper, J. E., & Quanbury, A. O. (2011). Experiences with using a pushrim-activated power-assisted wheelchair for community-based occupations: a qualitative exploration. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 78(2), 127-136.

Hammel, J., Jones, R., Smith, J., Sanford, J., Bodine, C., & Johnson, M. (2008). Environmental barriers and supports to the health, function, and participation of people with developmental and intellectual disabilities: report from the State of the Science in Aging with Developmental Disabilities Conference. Disability and Health Journal, 1(3), 143-149.

Hanson, J. L. (2004). The inclusive city: delivering a more accessible urban environment through design. Paper presented at the RICS Cobra 2004 International Construction Conference: responding to change.

Hjelle, K. M., & Vik, K. (2011). The ups and downs of social participation: experiences of wheelchair users in Norway. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(25-26), 2479-2489.

Hoenig, H., Landerman, L. R., Shipp, K. M., & L., G. (2003). Activity restriction among wheelchair users. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51(9), 1244-1251.

Jenkins, G. R., Yuen, H. K., & Vogtle, L. K. (2015). Experience of Multisensory Environments in Public Space among People with Visual Impairment. International journal of environmental research and public health, 12(8), 8644-8657.

Jones, M. A., & Catlin, J. H. (1978). Barrier-free design: design for access. Progressive Architecture, 59(4), 65-71.

Jutai, J., Coulson, S., & Russell-Minda, E. (2009). Technology and Medicine. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kaye, H. S., Kang, T., & LaPlante, M. P. (2000). Mobility device use in the United States. Disability Statistics Report, vol 14. from from http://www.disabled-world.com/pdf/mobility-report.pdf

Kerr, J., & Rosenberg, D. E. (2009). Walking route audit tool for seniors [WRATS]. Retrieved 2010-12-15, from www.activelivingresearch.org/files/WRATS_AuditTool_07.17.09.pdf

King, E. C., Dutta, T., Gorski, S. M., Holliday, P. J., & Fernie, G. R. (2011). Design of built environments to accommodate mobility scooter users: part II. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 6(5), 432-439.

Lofqvist, C., Pettersson, C., Iwarsson, S., & Brandt, A. (2012). Mobility and mobility-related participation outcomes of powered wheelchair and scooter interventions after 4-months and 1-year use. . Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 7(3), 211-218.

Martins, L. B., & Gaudiot, D. M. (2012). The deaf and the classroom design: a contribution of the built environmental ergonomics for the accessibility. Work, 41 Suppl 1, 3663-3668.

McClain, L., Cram, A., Wood, J., & Taylor, M. (1998). Wheelchair accessibility - Living the experience: Function in the community. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 18(1), 25-43.

McClain, L., Medrano, D., Marcum, M., & Schukar, J. (2000). A qualitative assessment of wheelchair users' experience with ADA compliance, physical barriers, and secondary health conditions. Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, 6(1), 99-118.

Mcintyre, L. J., & Hanson, V. L. (2014). Buildings and users with visual impairment: Uncovering factors for accessibility using BIT-Kit. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 16th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers & accessibility.

Meyers, A. R., Anderson, J. J., Miller, D. R., Shipp, K. M., & Hoenig, H. (2002). Barriers, facilitators, and access for wheelchair users: substantive and methodologic lessons from a pilot study of environmental effects. Social Science & Medicine, 55(8), 1435-1446.

Millington, C., Ward Thompson, C., Rowe, D., Aspinall, P., Fitzsimons, C., Nelson, N., et al. (2009). Development of the Scottish Walkability Assessment Tool (SWAT). Health Place, 15(2), 474-481.

Mortenson, W. B., Miller, W. C., Backman, C. L., & Oliffe, J. L. (2012). Association Between Mobility, Participation, and Wheelchair‐Related Factors in Long‐Term Care Residents Who Use Wheelchairs as Their Primary Means of Mobility. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(7), 1310-1315.

Porter, E. J., Matsuda, S., & Benson, J. J. (2011). Intentions of older homebound women about maintaining proximity to a cane or walker and using it at home. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 30(4), 485-504.

Rosenberg, D. E., Huang, D. L., Simonovich, S. D., & Belza, B. (2013). Outdoor built environment barriers and facilitators to activity among midlife and older adults with mobility disabilities. Gerontologist, 53(2), 268-279.

Routhier, F., Mortenson, W. B., Demers, L., Miller, W. C., Mahmood, A., Chaudhury, H., et al. (submitted september 2018). Mobility and participation of people with disaibilities using assistive technologies: Methods for the identification of psychological and physical environmental barriers and facilitators. JMIR.

Salminen, A. L., Brandt, A., Samuelsson, K., Toytari, O., & Malmivaara, A. (2009). Mobility devices to promote activity and participation: a systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 41(9), 697-706.

Smith, E. M., Giesbrecht, E. M., Mortenson, W. B., & Miller, W. C. (2016). Prevalence of wheelchair and scooter use among community-dwelling Canadians. Physical Therapy, 96(8), 1135-1142.

Stark, S., Hollingsworth, H. H., Morgan, K. A., & Gray, D. B. (2007). Development of a measure of receptivity of the physical environment. Disabil Rehabil, 29(2), 123-137.

Thapar, N., Warner, G., Drainoni, M. L., Williams, S. R., Ditchfield, H., Wierbicky, J., et al. (2004). A pilot study of functional access to public buildings and facilities for persons with impairments. Disabil Rehabil, 26(5), 280-289.

Wennberg, H., Hyden, C., & Stahl, A. (2010). Barrier-free outdoor environments: Older peoples’ perceptions before and after implementation of legislative directives. Transport policy, 17, 464-474.

Cover of the article

Downloads

Published

2020-05-30

How to Cite

Gamache, S., Routhier, F., Mortenson, W. B., Miller, W. C., & Martin Ginis, K. A. (2020). Objective evaluation of architectural obstacles encountered in two Canadian urban settings by mobility device users. Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, 10(1), 98–123. https://doi.org/10.17411/jacces.v10i1.186

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 1 (2020): Journal of Accessibility and Design for All

Section

Architecture and Construction

License

Copyright (c) 2020 Stéphanie Gamache, Francois Routhier, W. Ben Mortenson, William C Miller, Kathleen A Martin Ginis

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with Journal of Accessibility and Design for All agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share or adapt the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Use of the work for commercial purposes are not allowed.
  2. Authors are able to publish the journal's published version of the work in other media  (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as far as they inform the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All of that fact. When publishing their work in other sources, authors must mention the name of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All, its ISSN, the number and issue in which the article was published and a link to the main page of the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All. Optionally, they can also include a link to the article published in the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.