Preventive Medicine 51 (2010) 94–95

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Preventive Medicine

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r.com/ locate /ypmed

Letter to the Editor

Perceptions about and use of a new scenic bridge path amongwalkers, runners, and cyclists in lowcountry South Carolina

Table 1Characteristics of Survey Participants (N=393) (South Carolina, United States, 2007).

Characteristic n Percent

GenderFemale 221 56.2Male 171 43.5Unknown or missing 1

Race/EthnicityBlack 40 10.2White 338 86.0Unknown or missing 15

EducationHigh School/GED or less 56 14.2Some College, College Graduate, or Other Post High School 332 84.5Unknown or missing 5

How Crossing the Bridge Today?Walking 225 57.3Jogging or Running 101 25.7Biking 67 17.0Unknown or missing 0

Do You Ever Commute?Yes 41 10.4No 352 89.6Unknown or Missing 0

Has Your Overall Activity Level Increased?Yes 262 66.7No 129 32.8Unknown or Missing 2

Are You A Regular Walker On This Path?Yes 219 55.7No 173 44.0Unknown or Missing 1

Are You A Regular Runner On This Path?Yes 163 41.5No 227 57.8Unknown or Missing 3

Are You A Regular Bicyclist On This Path?Yes 88 22.4No 304 77.4Unknown or Missing 1

How Did You Get to the Path Today?Drove 286 72.8Walked, Ran, Biked, Used Public Transit, or Other 105 26.7Unknown or Missing 2

*Note that this table represents a summary of the survey analysis and not a replicationof the exact survey questions.

Keywords:Physical activityBuilt environmentBridge pathWalkingRunningCycling

Introduction

While there is documentation of the connection between environ-mental characteristics and physical activity levels (Gebel et al., 2007),little research explores the impact of a new facility (Gordon, et al., 2004;Meromet al., 2003) and no research explores the impact of a new bridgepath on activity levels. This study addresses a gap in the literature byexamining the impact that a new bridge path can have on activity levelsand by describing the attitudes of users toward the quality of the path.

Methods

Study protocols were approved by the College of Charleston InstitutionalReview Board. All respondents provided verbal consent.

Setting

This study was conducted on the 2.71 mile and 12 foot wide path on theArthur Ravenel Bridge which opened for automobile, foot, and bike traffic in2005 and connects Charleston to Mt. Pleasant over the Cooper River in SouthCarolina. The Arthur Ravenel Bridge replaced two aging bridges neither ofwhich offered pedestrian or bicycle access (S.C. DOT, 2009).

Data collection, design, and sample

This research is based on a cross-sectional, onsite, studywhich used data froman intercept questionnaire (closed and open-ended questions). The 5–10 minquestionnaireswere administeredverbally by trained student interviewers to 393adult path users, on weekdays and weekends, and during multiple times of theday (a total of 37 days between January and October 2007).

Quantitative and qualitative analyses

Descriptive statistics summarize the demographic profile of bridge usersand thematic analyses (Esterberg, 2002) summarize responses to open-ended questions about the quality of the bridge path.

Results

Characteristics of the sample

Table 1 shows that the sample (n=393) contained 57% walkers,26% runners, and 17% bike riders (mode of travel on the path on the

0091-7435/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.04.007

day of the survey). Ten percent of those surveyed indicated that theysometimes utilized the path to commute to work or conduct chores.The sample was largely white (86%), female (56%), and received some

95Letter to the Editor

post high school education (85%). On the day of the survey, 73% of theusers drove to the path to utilize it.

Regular mode of travel on the path

Walking was the activity that most participants engaged in regularlyon the path (56%) (“regular” is defined as utilizing the path on a once amonth ormore basis) (Table 1). According to chi-square analyses, genderwas the only factor (among gender, race, and education) that wassignificantly associated with whether someone was a self-reportedregular walker, runner or bicyclist. Women were more likely to reportbeing regular walkers (68% of women versus 40% of men) (P=0.000),and men were more likely to report both being regular runners (48% ofmen versus 37% of women) (Pb0.05) and bicyclists (36% of men versus11% of women) (P=0.000).

Self-reported activity levels

Respondents were asked “since the opening of the bridge path,how much has your overall activity level increased?” Sixty-sevenpercent of the respondents indicated that their activity levels hadincreased since the path opened (Table 1). Chi-square analyses wereperformed to determine whether the variable for self reportedincreases in activity levels varied across gender, race, or education.Analyses revealed no differences across gender or education.However, eighty-five percent of black respondents reported increasedactivity levels versus 64% of white respondents (Pb0.01).

Regular mode of travel on the path and self-reported activity levels

Finally, the variable for regular mode of travel on the path wasassociated with the variable for self reported activity levels. Seventy-fivepercent of those that were regular walkers versus 56% of those that werenot regular walkers reported increased activity levels (P=0.001). Therewasno significant relationshipbetween self-reported increases in activitylevels and regularity of running or biking on the bridge path.

User assessments of the quality of the path

Analysis of the open-ended portion of the questionnaires revealedthat respondents were pleased with the scenery (180 respondents),the incline (81 respondents), the feeling of safety provided by lightingand/or clear separation from vehicles (29 respondents), and theconvenient location (13 respondents).

Analysis revealed that respondents were displeased with the pooraccess to restroom/water facilities (91 respondents) and congestionin the form of tension between bike riders and walkers/runners (69respondents). They also noted safety concerns (25), of those, 17pointed to fear of crime and traffic in one of the parking areas and incrossing from the parking area to the path. Finally 23 respondentscomplained about pets and pet waste.

Discussion and conclusions

This project supports the evidence that physical activity can befacilitated by changes to the built environment and is the first to showthe positive impact of a bridge path on activity levels. The pathfacilitated increases in self-reported activity levels, with the greatestimpact on blacks and regular walkers. These findings indicate that theactivity needs of blacks and regular walkers (mostly women) areuniquely enhanced by supportive infrastructure. The facilitation ofactivity levels for black and female respondents is especially salient

given that this population is among the groups, including Hispanics,people of low income, and older people, who are least likely to meetrecommended physical activity levels (Dornelas, et al., 2007; Sharkeyand Branch, 2004; Swenson, et al., 2005). In addition, the path servesthe transportation needs of non-motorized travelers.

Responses on the open-ended portion of the questionnaires revealinformation that could potentially help planners to design additionalbridge paths. Respondents made favorable comments about the scenery,the incline, the safety, and the convenient location of the path.Respondents made critical comments about the access to restroom/water facilities, the congestion, the safety, and the pets and pet waste onthe path.

Study limitations and strengths

Limitations of this study include the cross-sectional design; it doesnot contain baseline information on activity levels. In addition, dataon activity levels are based on self reports; there is no way to knowwhether activity really did increase. Finally, the study utilizedinterceptor-based onsite questionnaires; therefore, some potentialrespondents passed by while interviews were conducted.

In spite of these limitations, the results show that thepath successfullyincreased self-reported activity levels and suggest that communities thatwant to create more opportunities for physical activity might be able toutilize existing assets, such as bridges, for path construction.

Funding

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Berkeley, Charles-ton, Dorchester Council of Governments provided funding.

Conflict of interest statementThe author declares that there are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

Thanks go to the 393 participants and to the student-interviewers.

References

Dornelas, E.A., Stepnowski, R.R., Fisher, E.H., Thomspon, P.D., 2007. Urban ethnicminority women's attendance at health clinic vs. church based exercise programs.J. Cross Cult. Gerontol. 22 (1), 129–136.

Esterberg, K.G., 2002. Qualitative Methods in Social Research. McGraw-Hill, Boston.Gebel, K., Bauman, A.E., Pettigrew, M., 2007. The physical environment and physical

activity a critical appraisal of review articles. Am. J. Prev. Med. 32, 361–369.Gordon, P.M., Zizzi, S.J., Pauline, J., 2004. Use of a community trail among new and

habitual exercisers: a preliminary assessment. Prev. Chron. Dis.: Public Health Res.Pract. Policy 1 (4), 1–11.

Merom, D., Bauman, A., Vita, P., Close, G., 2003. An environmental intervention topromote walking and cycling—the impact of a newly constructed rail trail inWestern Sydney. Prev. Med. 36 (2), 235–242.

S.C. DOT (South Carolina Department of Transportation), 2009. http://www.cooperriver-bridge.org/. Accessed January 2009.

Sharkey, J., Branch, L.G., 2004. Gender difference in physical performance, bodycomposition and dietary intake in homebound elders. J. Women Aging 16 (3–4),71–90.

Swenson, C.J., Marshall, J.A., Mikulich-Gilbertson, S.K., Baxter, J., Morgenstern, N., 2005.Physical activity in older, rural, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white adults. Med. Sci.Sports Exerc. 37 (6), 995–1002.

Deborah McCarthyDepartment of Sociology and Anthropology, College of Charleston,

66 George Street, Charleston, SC 29424-0001, USAE-mail address: mccarthyd@cofc.edu.

Fax: +1 8439535824.