Cultivating healthy trajectories: An experimental study of community gardening and health

A process evaluation of a randomized-controlled trial of community gardening to improve health behaviors and reduce stress and anxiety

As part of the Community Activation for Prevention (CAPS) randomized controlled trial (RCT) of community gardening, we conducted a process evaluation to assess the implementation of a community gardening intervention over nine months, as measured by reach, fidelity (delivery, receipt, enactment), and acceptability. Evaluation instruments included repeated semi-structured interviews with study participants, direct observation of community garden sites, and an exit survey of participants. Primary outcomes were diet, physical activity, and anthropometry; secondary outcomes were stress and anxiety. The CAPS trial included 291 participants (19% non-white; 34% Hispanic/Latino; 35% without a college degree; 58% with income < $50,000 per year). Intervention delivery and receipt were high for environmental supports. Garden social events were offered by 73% of gardens, although only 48% of intervention participants reported attending these events. Of the 145 participants assigned to the gardening intervention, 97 (67%) reported gardening the entire season and reported visiting the community garden a median of 90 min per week (range: 0-840). Of the participants who completed the exit survey (48%), 89% were highly satisfied with the overall garden experience. The CAPS trial was favorably received and implemented with high fidelity, supporting the validity of the trial outcomes. These findings suggest that community gardens are a viable health promotion strategy that can be successfully implemented among new gardeners from diverse backgrounds. Strategies that engage new gardeners in the social aspects of the garden environment and connect gardeners with garden "mentors" or "buddies" to ensure new gardeners achieve success in their first years of gardening are recommended.Trial registration: NCT03089177. Registered 24 March 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03089177 .

Effect of nature prescriptions on cardiometabolic and mental health, and physical activity: a systematic review

Nature prescriptions are gaining popularity as a form of social prescribing in support of sustainable health care. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature prescriptions and determine the factors important for their success. We searched five databases from inception up to July 25, 2021. Randomised and non-randomised controlled studies featuring a nature prescription (ie, a referral or an organised programme, by a health or social professional, to encourage spending time in nature) were included. Two reviewers independently conducted all steps of study selection; one reviewer collected summary data from published reports and conducted the risk of bias assessment. Random-effect DerSimonian-Laird meta-analyses were conducted for five key outcomes. We identified 92 unique studies (122 reports), of which 28 studies contributed data to meta-analyses. Compared with control conditions, nature prescription programmes resulted in a greater reduction in systolic blood pressure (mean difference -4·82 mm Hg [-8·92 to -0·72]) and diastolic blood pressure (mean difference -3·82 mm Hg [-6·47 to -1·16). Nature prescriptions also had a moderate to large effect on depression scores (post-intervention standardised mean difference -0·50 [-0·84 to -0·16]; change from baseline standardised mean difference -0·42 [-0·82 to -0·03]) and anxiety scores (post-intervention standardised mean difference -0·57 [-1·12 to -0·03]; change from baseline standardised mean difference -1·27 [-2·20 to -0·33]). Nature prescriptions resulted in a greater increase in daily step counts than control conditions (mean difference 900 steps [790 to 1010]) but did not improve weekly time of moderate physical activity (mean difference 25·90 min [-10·26 to 62·06]). A subgroup analysis restricted to studies featuring a referring institution showed stronger effects on depression scores, daily step counts, and weekly time of moderate physical activity than the general analysis. Beneficial effects on anxiety and depression scores were mainly provided by interventions involving social professionals whereas beneficial effects on blood pressures and daily step counts were provided mainly by interventions involving health professionals. Most studies have a moderate to high risk of bias. Nature prescription programmes showed evidence of cardiometabolic and mental health benefits and increases in walking. Effective nature prescription programmes can involve a range of natural settings and activities and can be implemented via social and community channels, in addition to health professionals.

Investigating the Usage Patterns of Park Visitors and Their Driving Factors to Improve Urban Community Parks in China: Taking Jinan City as an Example

Urban community parks have significant benefits for city residents, both physical and spiritual. This is especially true in developing countries, such as China. The purpose of our study is to describe the current situation of the community parks in five main districts of Jinan City while recognizing features of the community parks that influence usage patterns. Our study also means to determine the desired improvements of visitors that promote access to and use of community parks on the basis of the Chinese context. We conducted a survey among 542 community park visitors and obtained valid responses. The findings of respondents show that community parks are mostly used by people over 55 years (34.7%) and children under 10 years (23.6%). The main motives for using community parks are for exercise (24.2%) and to socialize with others (21.6%). The majority of respondents (65.7%) rated the community park as satisfactory and considered only a few improvements needed. Regarding the desired improvements, numerous respondents mentioned adding more physical training facilities (13.3%) and activity areas (7.6%), as well as emergency call buttons in areas frequented by children and older people (7.6%). Furthermore, most of the respondents (79.9%) indicated that they would like to use the community parks more frequently if there is additional progress to make the parks more attractive, cleaner, and friendlier. These results can help park designers, government agencies, and community groups to provide the planning and design strategies for community parks to promote their upgrading in China.

Community gardens and their effects on diet, health, psychosocial and community outcomes: a systematic review

Background

We systematically reviewed the effects of community gardens on physical and psychosocial health, health behaviors and community outcomes.

Methods

Quantitative studies that examined associations of health, psychosocial or community outcomes with community gardens were included in the review. Studies up to December 2020 were captured from searches of Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, EBSCOHost and CAB Abstracts. Data were extracted and study quality including risk of bias was examined.

Results

There were 53 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Studies examining associations between community gardens and nutrition or food security were most frequently reported (k = 23). Other factors examined for associations with community gardens were health (k = 16), psychosocial (k = 16) and community outcomes (k = 7). Effects appeared positive for fruit and vegetable intake, some psychosocial and community outcomes, but mixed for physical health outcomes. Evidence quality overall was low.

Conclusions

Community gardening was associated with higher fruit and vegetable intake, positive psychosocial and community outcomes, but poor evidence quality suggests the effects of community gardening may be overestimated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13591-1.