Suchergebnisse

BACKGROUND: Promoting active travel is an important part of increasing population physical activity, which has both physical and mental health benefits. A key benefit described by the then Scottish Government of the five-mile M74 motorway extension, which opened during June 2011 in the south of Glasgow, was that the forecast reduction in motor traffic on local streets would make these streets safer for walking and cycling, thus increasing active travel by the local population. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of new motorway infrastructure on the proportion of journey stages made actively (cycling or on foot) by individuals travelling in and out of the local area. METHODS: Data for the periods 2009-10 and 2012-13 were extracted from the Scottish Household Survey (SHS) travel diaries, which record each journey stage made during the previous day by a representative sample of the Scottish population aged 16 and over. Each individual journey stage was assigned to one of the following study areas surrounding existing and new transport infrastructure: (1) an area surrounding the new M74 motorway extension (n = 435 (2009-10), 543 (2012-13)), (2) a comparator area surrounding an existing motorway (n = 477 (2009-10), 560 (2012-13)), and (3) a control area containing no comparable motorway infrastructure (n = 541 (2009-10), 593 (2012-13)). Multivariable, multi-level regression analysis was performed to determine any between-area differences in change in active travel over time, which might indicate an intervention effect. Reference populations were defined using two alternative definitions, (1) Glasgow City and (2) Glasgow and surrounding local authorities. RESULTS: The results showed an increase in the proportion of journey stages using active travel in all study areas compared to both reference populations. However, there were no significant between-area differences to suggest an effect attributable the M74 motorway extension. CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear evidence that the M74 motorway extension either increased or decreased active travel in the local area. The anticipation by policy makers that reduced motorised traffic on local streets might increase journeys walked or cycled appears to have been unfounded. ; This study was funded by the NIHR Public Health Research programme (project number 11/3005/07: see http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/projects/phr/11300507) and DO is funded by the MRC Medical Research Council (MC_UP_12015/6). ; This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from BioMed Central via http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12966-016-0403-9

We evaluated the effects of a new motorway built through deprived neighbourhoods on travel behaviour in residents. This natural experiment comprised a longitudinal cohort (n=365) and two cross-sectional samples (baseline n=980; follow-up n=978) recruited in 2005 and 2013. Adults from one of three study areas - surrounding the new motorway (South), an existing motorway (East), or no motorway (North) - completed a previous day travel record. Adjusted two-part regression models examined associations between exposure and outcome. Compared to the North, cohort participants in the South were more likely to undertake travel by any mode (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.0-4.2) at follow-up. Within the South study area, cohort participants living closer to a motorway junction were more likely to travel by any mode at follow-up (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.1-19.7), and cross-sectional participants living closer were more likely to use a car at follow-up (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.1-10.7), compared to those living further away. Overall, the new motorway appeared to promote travel and car use in those living nearby, but did not influence active travel. This may propagate socioeconomic inequalities in non-car owners. ; LF is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Public Health Research programme (NIHR PHR; project number 11/3005/07) and the Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), a UKCRC Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. Funding from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research, and the Wellcome Trust, under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged (087636/Z/08/Z, ES/G007462/1, MR/K023187/1). DO and RP are supported by the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12015/6). FT is employed in a hybrid role between NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and Glasgow Centre for Population Health (GCPH). GCPH is a partnership between NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow City Council, and the University of Glasgow, funded by the Scottish Government.