Study objective: To (1) describe the setting and design of the Good Ageing in Lahti Region (GOAL) programme; (2) by using the baseline results of the GOAL cohort study, to examine whether living in urban, semi-urban, or rural communities is related to risk factors for chronic diseases and functional disability in ageing individuals. Design: The baseline data of a cohort study of ageing individuals living in three community types (urban, semi-urban, rural). Data were collected by two questionnaires and laboratory assessments. Setting: Fourteen municipalities in the Lahti region (Päijät-Häme County) in Finland. Participants: A regionally and locally stratified random sample of men and women born in 1946—50, 1936—40, and 1926—30. A total of 4,272 were invited and 2,815 (66%) participated. Main results: Elevated serum cholesterol, obesity, disability, sedentary lifestyle (<2 times/week walking), and high fat intake were more prevalent in rural vs. urban and semi-urban communities. After adjustment for sex, age, education, obesity, diet, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol use, rural communities remained the only community type with increased (p<0.05) probability for high BMI (OR 1.33) and high waist circumference (OR 1.43). Conclusions: The unfavourable health and lifestyle profile, together with an old population, makes health promotion for elderly citizens a special challenge for rural communities such as those in Päijät-Häme County, Finland. Most, if not all, of the differences in health between the three community types were explained by educational background, physical activity, and smoking.
Antolin P., Oxley H., Suyker W.How will ageing affect Finland? OECD Economics Department Working Papers 295, OECD Economics Department, ECO/ WKP(2001)21; 2001:1—43, Available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/35/1863374.pdf (accessed 5 August 2005).
2.
Allaire SH , LaValley MP, Evans SR, et al. Evidence for decline in disability and improved health among persons aged 55 to 70 years: The Framingham Heart Study. Am J Public Health1999;89:1678—83.
3.
Ostchega Y. , Harris TB, Hirsch R., et al. The prevalence of functional limitations and disability in older persons in the US: Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III. J Am Geriatr Soc2000;48:1132—5.
4.
Laukkanen P., Leskinen E., Kauppinen M., Sakari-Rantala R., Heikkinen E.Health and functional capacity as predictors of community dwelling among elderly people. J Clin Epidemiol2000;53:257—65.
5.
Van Schoor NM, Smit JH, Twisk JWR, Lips P.Impact of vertebral deformities, osteoarthritis, and other chronic diseases on quality of life: A population-based study. Osteoporosis Int2005;16:749—56.
6.
Freedman VA, Martin LG, Schoeni RFRecent trends in disability and functioning among older adults in the United States: A systematic review. JAMA2002;288:3137—46.
7.
Burden of Disease Network Project.Disability in old age (BURDIS). Finnish Centre for Interdisciplinary Gerontology University of Jyväskylä Finland, 2004:1—47.
8.
Nelson ME, Layne JE, Bernstein MJ, et al. The effects of multidimensional home-based exercise on functional performance in elderly people. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci2004;59:154—60.
9.
Singer BH, Manton KGThe effects of health changes on projections on health services needs for the elderly population in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA1998;95: 15618—22.
10.
Waidmann T., Liu K.Disability trends among the elderly and implications for the future . J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci2000;55:S298—307.
11.
Aromaa A, Koskinen S, editors, Health and functional capacity in Finland. Baseline results of the Health 2000 Health Examination Survey. Publications of the National Public Health Institute B12/2004. Helsinki: National Public Health Institute; 2004. p. 1—148.
12.
Takano T. , Nakamura K.An analysis of health levels and various indicators of urban environments for Healthy Cities projects. J Epidemiol Community Health2001;55:263—70.
13.
Robert SA , Strombom I., Trentham-Dietz A., et al. Socioeconomic risk factors for breast cancer: Distinguishing individual- and community-level effects. Epidemiology2004;15:442—50.
14.
Blom-Lange M.[Mortality, morbidity and socio-economic factors in municipalities of Päijät-Häme hospital district, in the Päijät-Häme hospital district and in large cities (in Finnish)]. Publications of the Päijät-Häme hospital district A4/1999. Lahti: Päijät-Häme hospital district; 1999. p. 1—74.
15.
Karisto A., Nummela O., Konttinen R., et al. [The ageing Päijät-Häme. Report of community well-being (in Finnish)]. University of Helsinki, Palmenia Centre for Research and Continuing Education, reports and surveys 41/2003. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Palmenia Centre for Research and Continuing Education ; 2003. p. 1—149.
16.
Webster P.Review of the ``City Health Profiles'' produced by WHO-Healthy Cities — do they present information on health and its determinants and what are their perceived benefits?J Epidemiol Community Health1999;53:125—7.
17.
Uutela A. , Absetz P., Nissinen A., et al. Health psychological theory in promoting population health in Päijät-Häme, Finland: First steps toward a type 2 diabetes prevention study. J Health Psychol2004;9:73—84.
18.
Aalto A-M. , Aro AR, Teperi J.RAND-36 terveyteen liittyvän elämänlaadun mittarina. Mittarin luotettavus ja suomalaiset väestöarvot [RAND-36 as an indicator of health-related quality of life. The validity of the method and Finnish reference values (in Finnish)]. STAKES tutkimuksia/ Research by the National Research Centre for Welfare andHealth, nr. 101. Helsinki, 1999. p. 1—78.
19.
Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel RMThe RAND 36-Item health Survey 1.0. Health Econ1993;2:213—15.
20.
Gardner MJ , Altman DGCalculating confidence intervals for proportions and their differences. In: Gardner MJ, Altman DG, editors. Statistics with confidence — confidence intervals and statistical guidelines . London : British Medical Journal ; 1989. p. 28—33.
21.
Statistics Finland.Väestöennuste kunnittain 2001—2030 [Population projection by municipalities 2001—2030 (in Finnish with English summary and titles)]. Helsinki : Statistics Finland; 2001. p. 31, 45.
22.
Troped PJ , Saunders RP, Pate RR, et al. Correlates of recreational and transportation physical activity among adults in a New England community. Prev Med2003;37: 304—10.
23.
Patterson PK, Chapman NJUrban form and older residents' service use, walking, driving, quality of life, and neighborhood satisfaction . Am J Health Promotion2004;19:45—52.
24.
Parks SE, Housemann RA, Brownson RCDifferential correlates of physical activity in urban and rural adults of various socioeconomic backgrounds in the United States. J Epidemiol Community Health2003;57:29—35.
25.
Shipton D. , Glazier RH, Guan J., et al. Effects of use of specialty services on disease-modifying antirheumatic drug use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in an insured elderly population. Med Care2004;42:907—13.
26.
Turrell G. , Blakely T., Patterson C., et al. A multilevel analysis of socioeconomic (small area) differences in household food purchasing behaviour. J Epidemiol Community Health2004 ;58:208—15.
27.
Visser M. , Langlois J., Guralnik JM, et al. High body fatness, but not low fat-free mass, predicts disability in older men and women. The Cardiovascular Health Study. Am J Clin Nutr1998;68:584—90.
28.
Wannamethee SG, Shaper AG, Whincup PH, et al. Overweight and obesity and the burden of disease and disability in elderly men. Int J Obes2004;28:1374—82.
29.
Turcato E. , Bosello O., Di Francesco V., et al. Waist circumference and abdominal sagittal diameter as surrogates of body fat distribution in the elderly: Their relation with cardiovascular risk factors. Int J Obes2000;24:1005—10.
30.
WHOObesity: Preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation on obesity . WHO Technical Report Series2000;894:1—253.
31.
Fogelholm M., Kujala U., Kaprio J., Sarna S.Predictors of weight change in middle-aged and old men. Obes Res2000;8:367—73.
32.
Sorensen G., Emmons K., Hunt MK, Johnston D.Implications of the results of community intervention trials. Ann Rev Public Health1998;19:379—416.
33.
McLeroy K. , Bibeau D., Steckler D., Glanz K.An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q1988;15:351—77.
