Background/Purpose
Prior research (Cardinal & Spaziani, 2003; Rimmer et al., 2004) has identified fitness facility accessibility issues, and has called for further determination of current accessibility in order to better address accessibility issues.
Method
This study analyzed a randomly stratified sample of 29 non-profit community fitness centers across seven Midwestern states via the Accessibility Instruments Measuring Fitness and Recreation Environments (AIMFREE) Fitness Center and Swimming Pool Accessibility Professional Version survey.
Analysis/Results
Univariate ANOVA analysis revealed significant differences, F(14, 381) = 13.06, p < .001, in the mean values for the summary assessment on a 7-point Likert scale for 15 accessibility factors. Post hoc analyses identified that telephones were significantly less accessible (M = 2.31) than all other facility factors; while parking, the highest rated factor (M = 6.14), was significantly higher than seven other accessibility factors. Pearson's correlation analyses identified significant (p < .05) positive relationships between facility size and the following components: equipment (r = .421), professional support and training (r = .557), policies (r = .398), and group exercise (r = .402). Significant positive correlations were determined between construction year and nine survey components including: access routes/entrances (r = .609), information/signage (r = .552), equipment (r = .565), locker rooms (r = .488), restrooms (r = .634), pools (r = .588), saunas/steam rooms (r = .645), elevators (r = .521), and water fountains (r = .635).
Conclusions
These results provided baseline descriptive data on accessibility and valuable information to inform facility operators and administrators in improving these facilities.
See more of: Research Consortium