Barriers to, and Facilitators of, Exercising in Fitness Centres among Adults with and without Physical Disabilities: A Scoping Review

Helene Nikolajsen, Louise Fleng Sandal, Carsten Bogh Juhl, Jens Troelsen and Birgit Juul-Kristensen
Additional contact information
Helene Nikolajsen: Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark
Louise Fleng Sandal: Research Unit for Physical Activity and Health in Work Life, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark
Carsten Bogh Juhl: Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark
Jens Troelsen: Research Unit for Active Living, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark
Birgit Juul-Kristensen: Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense, Denmark

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 14, 1-32

Abstract: Fitness centres are an obvious arena for performing physical activity for the general population but representation of adults with physical disabilities (AwPD) is lacking. To increase possibilities for AwPD to exercise in fitness centres together with adults without physical disabilities (AwoPD), the aim of this study was to identify, synthesise, and compare barriers to, and facilitators of, exercising in fitness centres for each group. A scoping review was conducted and data extraction of the barriers and facilitators was performed independently by two researchers on six categories of contextual factors based on the framework of Di Blasi: (1) The fitness centre setting; (2) The fitness centre user characteristics; (3) The fitness instructor/staff characteristics; (4) The fitness centre user–instructor/management relationship; and (5) The fitness/exercise characteristics. An extra category, (6) Other relationships, was added. The PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews was used for reporting. Of the 102 included papers, only 26 (25%) of the papers were on AwPD, which focused mainly on physical barriers (category 1: inaccessible settings). In contrast, the remaining 76 papers involving AwoPD focused primarily on facilitators (category 2: motivational factors and exercising effects). In categories 3–6, the two groups had similar results, as both groups preferred skilled instructors, a welcoming and comfortable fitness centre environment, an ability to exercise at their preferred type and level, and good social connections. Since most data were based on AwoPD, more studies on actual experiences from AwPD are needed, to reveal the facilitators/motivational factors for fitness centre use.

Keywords: fitness centre; gym; disabilities; contextual factors; accessibility; personal factors; fitness instructors; social connections; scoping review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/14/7341/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/14/7341/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:14:p:7341-:d:591251

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().