The purpose of this study is to examine the barriers to accessibility of parks, trails, swimming pools, and fitness facilities. The study also aims to improve the accessibility of fitness and recreation facilities in order to increase physical activity participation among persons with disabilities.
In October 2004, Dr. Riley, along with co-investigator Dr. William Schiller, traveled to Kansas and Missouri to conduct a pilot test of the Improving Accessibility study. I was pleased to be one of eight participants with physical disabilities who assisted with the assessment of fitness centers and swimming pools. We completed the consumer version of the AIMFREE questionnaire (Accessibility Instruments Measuring Fitness and Recreation Environments) and identified a few fitness or recreation facilities in the community that we would like to use but find inaccessible. One is an older facility built in the 1970s needing major retro-fitting or renovation to become accessible.
The AIMFREE questionnaire asked us questions regarding parking, entering the facility, locker height, roominess of the locker rooms, access to showers, whirlpools, swimming pools, usability of fitness equipment, signage, whether there were modified classes available, access to drinking fountains, restrooms and pay phones, and so on. The questionnaire is a very thorough survey of the barriers that exist, as well as accommodations and practices that encourage use by persons with disabilities.
In addition, we were each given a cell phone camera to take pictures of inaccessible areas of the facility. Study investigators were particularly interested in assessing the feasibility of using the cell phone camera to record images, and later upload them to a website where they can be viewed in "real time." I found this aspect of the study highly beneficial. The cell phone camera will allow a participant to record images that can be reviewed by a researcher located in Chicago.
The cell phone camera is an effective tool for communicating existing barriers as it supplements and clarifies some of the questionnaire responses. For example, while there was a designated disabled parking space and a path of access from the parking lot into the facility, the entry was not free of barriers. There is an entry awning supported with closely-spaced multiple poles. With the cell phone camera, I could illustrate that these poles were directly in the way when I deployed my van lift, and that I had to navigate tightly to even get off my lift. I would either have to leave clearance by not fully pulling into the space or somehow situate my lift to deploy between poles. It was much easier to communicate this in a camera image.
Both the whirlpool and the sauna had steps which were barriers. The locker room itself was accessible; however, the changing stalls were too narrow and too small to accommodate a wheelchair. The showers had a 1-inch-high edging around them, preventing me from rolling in. Another image that I took with the camera was in the restroom. The stall was barely wide enough to roll straight in, and there was a drain in the floor; on camera you can see that with the slope of the drain, my chair is uneven and my left wheel wobbling. This would make any sort of transfers from chair to toilet hazardous.
The cell phone camera images enable researchers to see and understand the difficulties as we evaluate them on-site. Part of the difficulty with ADA compliance and accessibility is that architects and contractors seldom understand the "whys" of the ADA -- why light switches need to be lower, why wood chips around picnic areas are hampering, why a straight ramp into a pool might be easier to navigate than a curved one, why edges around showers pose a problem, and so on. Having images to demonstrate, as we are doing with AIMFREE, is a huge asset to explaining challenges and then improving access to parks, trails, swimming pools, and fitness facilities. Sometimes, a picture is truly worth a thousand words.