Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-rnj55 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-18T15:28:40.994Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Quality of Life of Older Adults Living in an Urban Environment: Professional and Lay Perspectives*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

L. Richard ,
S. Laforest ,
F. Dufresne  and
J.P. Sapinski
L. Richard*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal GRIS, Université de Montréal Research Centre, Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal
S. Laforest
Affiliation:
GRIS, Université de Montréal Kinesiology Department, Université de Montréal CLSC René-Cassin/Institute of Social Gerontology of Quebec
F. Dufresne
Affiliation:
Senior Citizens/ Forum of Montreal
J.P. Sapinski
Affiliation:
Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal GRIS, Université de Montréal
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to: / Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être addressées à : Lucie Richard, Ph.D., Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, P.O. Box 6128, Station Centre-ville, Montreal, QC H3C 3J7. (Lucie.Richard@Umontreal.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study aimed to identify factors affecting older adults' quality of life in urban environments and to compare older adults' and professionals' perspectives on the issue. Eleven focus groups were conducted (eight involving older adults, three involving professionals), each discussing a wide range of issues related to determinants of health and quality of life. The most salient themes were health and independence, financial security, social integration, health care services, housing, accessibility of community services, and decision-making power. Older adults' and professionals' comments strongly converged, with specific issues also raised by each. Older adults provided the richest and most in-depth data on intrapersonal factors, such as personal growth, personal qualities, and spirituality. Professionals discussed community environment issues in greater depth. Health promotion interventions to maximize older adults' quality of life are needed. These results contribute to building a knowledge base to guide such efforts, by identifying a variety of possible intervention sectors for future programs.

Résumé

Cette étude vise à identifier les facteurs reliés à la qualité de vie en milieu urbain chez les aînés et comparer les perspectives professionnelles et celles des personnes âgées en ce domaine. Les données ont été recueillies lors de groupes de discussion avec des aînés (n=8) et des professionnels (n=3). Les résultats révèlent une variété de thèmes, reflétant une gamme élargie de déterminants de la santé et de la qualité de vie et ce, chez les deux types de participants. Parmi les thèmes saillants figurent : la santé et l'indépendance, la sécurité financière, l'intégration sociale, les services de santé, les logements, l'accès aux services communautaires et le pouvoir décisionnel. Les commentaires desaînés et des professionels sont très convergents. Des questions spécifiques sont envoquées par chacun des deux types de participants. Les aînés ont discuté de façon beaucoup plus marquée des questions liées à la croissance et aux qualités personnelles de même qu'à la spiritualité. Les questions reliées à l'environnement ont fait l'objet de descriptions beaucoup plus étoffées chez les professionnels. En identifiant clairement une gamme de cibles d'action, ces résultats contribuent à enrichir les connaissances devant soutenir le développement d'interventions de promotion de la santé des aînés.

Keywords

older adultshealth promotiondeterminants of healthquality of lifeagingaînéspromotion de la santédéterminants de la santéqualité de vievieillissement
Type
Articles: Symposium: Aging Well
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , Spring/Printemps 2005 , pp. 19 - 30
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was a part of a national project coordinated by the Centre for Health Promotion Research, University of Toronto. It was funded by Health Canada's Population Health Fund. Lucie Richard is a FRSQ Scholar (#23187–2192). This study was coordinated by a Coordination Committee consisting of Francine Dufresne, Henri Gervais, Sophie Laforest, Jacques Landry, Lorette Langlais, Gilles Larocque, Jean-Claude Martin, Madeleine Préclaire, and Lucie Richard. The Advisory Committee was composed of Lise Beaudoin, Jacques Boivin, Francine Dufresne, Berthe Dupont, Henri Gervais, Pierre Lapointe, Michelle Pelletier, Pierre Pineau, Lucie Richard, Huguette Robert, Anna-Maria Rodriguez, Pierre Saul, Francine Trickey, and Odette Viens. The authors gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the participants to this study. They also want to thank Silvia Straka and Maria Elisa Montejo for their invaluable help.

References

Abeles, R.P., Gift, H.C., & Ory, M.G. (Eds.) (1994). Aging and quality of life. New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Bryant, T., Raphael, D., Brown, I., Cogan, C., Dallaire, C., Laforest, S., McGowan, P., Richard, L., Thompson, L., & Young, J. (2002). A Nation for all ages? A participatory study of Candian seniors' quality of life in seven municipalities. Toronto: Centre for Health Studies, York University.Google Scholar
Bryant, T.D., Raphael, D., Brown, I., Cogan, T., Dallaire, C., Laforest, S., McGowan, P., Rhapael, D., Richard, L., Thompson, L., & Young, J. (2004). What do Canadian seniors say supports their quality of life: Findings from a National Participatory Research Study. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 95, 299–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craig, D.M. (2000). Health promotion with older adults. In Stewart, M.J. (Ed.), Community health nursing: Promoting Canadians' health (2nd ed.). Toronto: Saunders.Google Scholar
Draper, P. (1997). Nursing perspectives on quality of life. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eakin, J., Robertson, A., Poland, B., Coburn, D., & Edwards, R. (1996). Towards a critical social science perspective on health promotion research. Health Promotion International, 11(2), 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebrahim, S. (1997). Public health implications of ageing. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 51, 469–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ebrahim, S. (1999). Disability in older people: A mass problem requiring mass solutions. Lancet, 353, 1990–1992.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, R.G., Barer, M., & Marmor, T.R. (Eds.) (1994). Why are some people healthy and others not? The determinants of health of populations. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fry, P.S. (2000a). Guest editorial. Aging and quality of life (QOL): The continuing search for quality of life indicators. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 50(4), 245–261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fry, P.S. (2000b). Whose quality of life is it anyway? Why not ask seniors to tell us about it? International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 50(4), 361–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gendron, S. (2001). Transformative alliance between qualitative and quantitative approaches in health promotion research. In Rootman, I., Goodstadt, M., Hyndman, B., McQueen, D.V., Potvin, L., Springett, J., & Ziglio, E. (Eds.), Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Publications.Google Scholar
Glass, T.A., & Balfour, J.L. (2003). Neighbourhoods, aging, and functional limitations. In Kawachi, I., & Berkman, L.F. (Eds.), Neighbourhoods and health (pp. 303–334). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, L.W., Richard, L., & Potvin, L. (1996). Ecological foundation of health promotion. American Journal of Health Promotion, 10(4), 270–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heidrich, S.M. (1998). Health promotion in old age. Annual Review of Nursing Research, 16, 173–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunt, S.M. (1997). The problem of quality of life. Quality of life research, 6, 205–212.Google ScholarPubMed
Jylhä, M. (1995). Health-related quality of life in old age: How to define it, how to study? In Heikkinen, E.Preparation for aging (pp. 139–144). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, C., & Fleury, J. (2000). Health promotion for the elderly. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krueger, R.A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
McKinlay, J.B. (1995). The new public health approach to improving physical activity and autonomy in older populations. In Heikkinen, E. (Ed.), Preparation for aging (pp. 87–103). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeroy, K.R., Bibeau, D., Steckler, A., & Glanz, K. (1988). An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Education Quarterly, 15(4), 351–377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michalos, A.C., Humbley, A.M., Zumbo, B.D., & Hemingway, D. (2001). Health and other aspects of the quality of life of older people. Social Indicators Research, 54, 239–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minkler, M., Schauffler, H., & Clements-Nolle, K. (2000). Health promotion for older American in the 21st century. American Journal of Health Promotion, 14, 371–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raphael, D. (2001). Evaluation of quality-of-life initiatives in health promotion. In Rootman, I., Goodstadt, M., Hyndman, B., D.V., , McQueen, , Potvin, L., Springett, J., & Ziglio, E. (Eds.), Evaluation in health promotion: Principles and perspectives. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Publications.Google Scholar
Raphael, D., Brown, I., Bryant, T., Wheeler, J., Herman, R., Houston, J., Hussain, M., Lanphier, C., Lightfoot, B., McClelland, B., McIntosh, B., Stevens, I., Weisbeck, F. (2001). How government policy decisions affect seniors' quality of life: Findings from a participatory policy study carried out in Toronto, Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 92(3), 190–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raphael, D., Brown, I., Renwick, R., Cava, M., Weir, N., & Heathcote, K. (1995). The quality of life of seniors living in the community: A conceptualization with implications for public health practice. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 86(4), 228–233.Google ScholarPubMed
Raphael, D., Steinmetz, B., Renwick, R., Rootman, I., Brown, I., Sehdev, H., Phillips, S., & Smith, T. (1999). The Community Quality of Life Project: A health promotion approach to understanding communities. Health Promotion International, 14(3), 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richard, L., Laforest, S., Dufresne, F., & Sapinski, J.P. (2001). Quality of life of older adults living in Montreal: Associated factors and courses of action. Montreal: Senior Citizens' Forum of Montreal, Montréal-Centre Public Health Directorate, Université de Montréal.Google Scholar
Schwab, M., & Syme, S.L. (1997). On paradigms, community participation, and the future of public health. American Journal of Public Health, 87, 2049–2051.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smedley, B.D., & Syme, S.L. (Eds.). (2000). Promoting health: Intervention strategies from social and behavioral research; A report of the Institute of Medicine. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
World Health Organisation, Health and Welfare Canada, &the Canadian Public Health Association (1986). Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 77, 425–430.Google Scholar