背景:生活质量(QoL)是反映个人基于个人目标和价值观的评价的主观指标。虽然全球研究表明,种族多样性和社会文化动态等邻里因素对生活质量的影响,这些在尼泊尔的背景下是未被探索的。因此,这项研究调查了尼泊尔东部尼泊尔老年人的邻里环境与生活质量之间的关系。
方法:这项横断面研究涉及来自尼泊尔东部两个地区的847名非住院老年人(年龄≥60岁)。使用13项简短的老年人生活质量问卷评估QoL,其中平均得分<3表示QoL低/差。邻里环境,概念化跨越三个领域(人口统计,社会文化,和建筑环境),包括种族多样性,与家庭的联系,朋友,和邻居,文化纽带,住宅稳定性,和乡村。使用多变量逻辑回归检查了它们与QoL的关联。
结果:大约20%的老年人报告QoL较差。种族多样性较高(调整后赔率比[aOR]=0.12,95%置信区间[CI]:0.04-0.36),与家人和亲戚的中度接触(aOR=0.26,CI:0.11-0.61),与邻居的高接触(aOR=0.09,CI:0.03-0.21)与QoL差的较低几率相关。相反,与朋友的高接触(aOR=2.29,CI:1.30-4.04)和居住不稳定(OR=6.25,CI:2.03-19.23)增加了生活质量差的可能性。此外,在协变量中,慢性疾病,烟草使用,失业,缺乏教育也与生活质量差显著相关。
结论:总体而言,人口环境,社会文化因素,邻里的建筑环境会影响QoL。因此,使邻里的种族构成多样化,促进社会关系,如与家人频繁接触,亲戚,和邻居,确保居住稳定可以提高老年人的生活质量。
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) is a subjective measure reflecting individuals\' evaluations based on their personal goals and values. While global research shows the role of neighborhood factors like ethnic diversity and socio-cultural dynamics on QoL, these are unexplored in the Nepali context. Therefore, this study examined the relationship between neighborhood environment and QoL among Nepali older adults in eastern Nepal.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 847 non-institutionalized older adults (aged ≥ 60 years) from two districts in eastern Nepal. QoL was evaluated using the 13-item brief Older People\'s Quality of Life questionnaire, where a mean score of < 3 indicated low/poor QoL. The neighborhood environment, conceptualized across three domains (demographic, socio-cultural, and built environment), included ethnic diversity, connections with family, friends, and neighbors, cultural ties, residential stability, and rurality. Their association with QoL was examined using multivariable logistic regression.
RESULTS: Around 20% of older adults reported poor QoL. Higher ethnic diversity (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.04-0.36), moderate contact with family and relatives (aOR = 0.26, CI: 0.11-0.61), and high contact with neighbors (aOR = 0.09, CI: 0.03-0.21) were associated with lower odds of poor QoL. Conversely, high contact with friends (aOR = 2.29, CI: 1.30-4.04) and unstable residence (OR = 6.25, CI: 2.03-19.23) increased the odds of poor QoL. Additionally, among the covariates, chronic disease, tobacco use, unemployment, and lack of education were also significantly associated with poor QoL.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the demographic environment, socio-cultural factors, and the built environment of the neighborhood influence QoL. Therefore, diversifying the neighborhood\'s ethnic composition, promoting social connections such as frequent contact with family, relatives, and neighbors, and ensuring residential stability can enhance the QoL of older adults.