Article

Green qualities in the neighbourhood and mental health - results from a longitudinal cohort study in Southern Sweden.

Faculty of Landscape Planning, Horticulture, and Agricultural Sciences, Department of Work Science, Business Economics and Environmental Psychology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden. .
BMC Public Health (Impact Factor: 2.08). 05/2012; 12:337. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-337
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Poor mental health is a major issue worldwide and causality is complex. For diseases with multifactorial background synergistic effects of person- and place- factors can potentially be preventive. Nature is suggested as one such positive place-factor. In this cohort study we tested the effect of defined green qualities (Serene, Space, Wild, Culture, Lush) in the environment at baseline on mental health at follow-up. We also studied interaction effects on mental health of those place factors and varied person factors (financial stress, living conditions, and physical activity).
Data on person factors were extracted from a longitudinal (years 1999/2000 and 2005) population health survey (n = 24945). The participants were geocoded and linked to data on green qualities from landscape assessments, and stored in the Geographical Information System (GIS). Crude odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, and multivariate logistic analyses were performed.
Mental health was not affected by access to the chosen green qualities, neither in terms of amount nor in terms of any specific quality. However, we found a reduced risk for poor mental health at follow-up among women, through a significant interaction effect between physical activity and access to the qualities Serene or Space. For men the tendencies were similar, though not significant. Regarding the other three green qualities, as well as amount of qualities, no statistically certain synergistic effects were found. Likewise, no significant synergies were detected between green qualities and the other person-factors. Only advanced exercise significantly reduced the risk for poor mental health among women, but not for men, compared to physical inactivity.
The results do not directly support the hypothesis of a preventive mental health effect by access to the green qualities. However, the additive effect of serene nature to physical activity contributed to better mental health at follow-up. This tendency was equal for both sexes, but statistically significant only for women.Objective landscape assessments may be important in detangling geographic determinants of health. This study stresses the importance of considering interaction effects when dealing with disorders of multifactorial background.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
139 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Growing evidence suggests that close contact with nature brings benefits to human health and well-being, but the proposed mechanisms are still not well understood and the associations with health remain uncertain. The Positive Health Effects of the Natural Outdoor environment in Typical Populations in different regions in Europe (PHENOTYPE) project investigates the interconnections between natural outdoor environments and better human health and well-being. The PHENOTYPE project explores the proposed underlying mechanisms at work (stress reduction/restorative function, physical activity, social interaction, exposure to environmental hazards) and examines the associations with health outcomes for different population groups. It implements conventional and new innovative high-tech methods to characterise the natural environment in terms of quality and quantity. Preventive as well as therapeutic effects of contact with the natural environment are being covered. PHENOTYPE further addresses implications for land-use planning and green space management. The main innovative part of the study is the evaluation of possible short-term and long-term associations of green space and health and the possible underlying mechanisms in four different countries (each with quite a different type of green space and a different use), using the same methodology, in one research programme. This type of holistic approach has not been undertaken before. Furthermore there are technological innovations such as the use of remote sensing and smartphones in the assessment of green space. The project will produce a more robust evidence base on links between exposure to natural outdoor environment and human health and well-being, in addition to a better integration of human health needs into land-use planning and green space management in rural as well as urban areas.
    BMJ Open 01/2014; 4(4):e004951. · 1.58 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study aims to find whether proximity to urban green spaces is associated with human mental health. A cross-sectional examination of the relationship between access to urban green spaces and counts of anxiety/mood disorder treatments amongst residents (aged 15 years and over) in Auckland City, New Zealand. Anxiety/mood disorder treatment counts by three age groups were aggregated to 3149 small area units in Auckland. Six measures of green space access were derived using GIS techniques involving total green spaces and useable green spaces. Negative binomial regression models have been fitted to test the relationship between access to green space and area-level anxiety/mood disorder treatment counts, adjusted for age and area-level deprivation. Anxiety/mood disorder treatment counts were associated with three green space measures. The proportion of both total and useable green space within 3 km and distance to nearest useable green space all indicated a protective effect of increased access to green space against anxiety/mood disorder treatment counts. Access to total and useable green space within 300 m did not exhibit significant associations. This study found that decreased distance to useable green space and increased proportion of green space within the larger neighbourhood were associated with decreased anxiety/mood disorder treatment counts in an urban environment. This suggests the benefits of green space on mental health may relate both to active participation in useable green spaces near to the home and observable green space in the neighbourhood environment.
    Public health 11/2013; · 1.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent ecosystem service models have placed biodiversity as a central factor in the processes that link the natural environment to health. While it is recognized that disturbed ecosystems might negatively affect human well-being, it is not clear whether biodiversity is related to or can promote "good" human health and well-being. The aim of this study was to systematically identify, summarize, and synthesize research that had examined whether biodiverse environments are health promoting. The objectives were twofold: (1) to map the interdisciplinary field of enquiry and (2) to assess whether current evidence enables us to characterize the relationship. Due to the heterogeneity of available evidence a narrative synthesis approach was used, which is textual rather than statistical. Extensive searches identified 17 papers that met the inclusion criteria: 15 quantitative and 2 qualitative. The evidence was varied in disciplinary origin, with authors approaching the question using different study designs and methods, and conceptualizations of biodiversity, health, and well-being. There is some evidence to suggest that biodiverse natural environments promote better health through exposure to pleasant environments or the encouragement of health-promoting behaviors. There was also evidence of inverse relationships, particularly at a larger scale (global analyses). However, overall the evidence is inconclusive and fails to identify a specific role for biodiversity in the promotion of better health. High-quality interdisciplinary research is needed to produce a more reliable evidence base. Of particular importance is identifying the specific ecosystem services, goods, and processes through which biodiversity may generate good health and well-being.
    Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B 01/2014; 17(1):1-20. · 3.90 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
51 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014

Matilda Van den Bosch