Search

OBJECTIVE Car dependency contributes to physical inactivity and, consequently, may increase the likelihood of diabetes. We investigated whether neighborhoods that are highly conducive to driving confer a greater risk of developing diabetes and, if so, whether this differs by age. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We used administrative health care data to identify all working-age Canadian adults (20–64 years) who were living in Toronto on 1 April 2011 without diabetes (type 1 or 2). Neighborhood drivability scores were assigned using a novel, validated index that predicts driving patterns based on built environment features divided into quintiles. Cox regression was used to examine the association between neighborhood drivability and 7-year risk of diabetes onset, overall and by age-group, adjusting for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. RESULTS Overall, there were 1,473,994 adults in the cohort (mean age 40.9 ± 12.2 years), among whom 77,835 developed diabetes during follow-up. Those living in the most drivable neighborhoods (quintile 5) had a 41% higher risk of developing diabetes compared with those in the least drivable neighborhoods (adjusted hazard ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.37–1.44), with the strongest associations in younger adults aged 20–34 years (1.57, 95% CI 1.47–1.68, P < 0.001 for interaction). The same comparison in older adults (55–64 years) yielded smaller differences (1.31, 95% CI 1.26–1.36). Associations appeared to be strongest in middle-income neighborhoods for younger residents (middle income 1.96, 95% CI 1.64–2.33) and older residents (1.46, 95% CI 1.32–1.62). CONCLUSIONS High neighborhood drivability is a risk factor for diabetes, particularly in younger adults. This finding has important implications for future urban design policies.

Background: Car driving is a form of passive transport that is associated with an increase in physical inactivity, obesity, air pollution and noise. Built environment characteristics may influence transport mode choice, but comprehensive indices for built environment characteristics that drive car use are still lacking, while such an index could provide tangible policy entry points. Objective: We developed and validated a neighbourhood drivability index, capturing combined dimensions of the neighbourhood environment in the City of Toronto, and investigated its association with transportation choices (car, public transit or active transport), overall, by trip length, and combined for residential neighbourhood and workplace drivability. Methods: We used exploratory factor analysis to derive distinct factors (clusters of one or more environmental characteristics) that reflect the degree of car dependency in each neighbourhood, drawing from candidate variables that capture density, diversity, design, destination accessibility, distance to transit, and demand management. Area-level factor scores were then combined into a single composite score, reflecting neighbourhood drivability. Negative binomial generalized estimating equations were used to test the association between driveability quintiles (Q) and primary travel mode (>50% of trips by car, public transit, or walking/cycling) in a population-based sample of 63,766 Toronto residents enrolled in the Transportation Tomorrow Survey (TTS) wave 2016, adjusting for individual and household characteristics, and accounting for clustering of respondents within households. Results: The drivability index consisted of three factors: Urban sprawl, pedestrian facilities and parking availability. Relative to those living in the least drivable neighbourhoods (Q1), those in high drivability areas (Q5) had a significantly higher rate of car travel (adjusted Risk Ratio (RR): 1.80, 95%CI: 1.77–1.88), and lower rate of public transit use (RR: 0.90, 95%CI: 0.85–0.94) and walking/cycling (RR: 0.22, 95%CI: 0.19–0.25). Associations were strongest for short trips (

The COVID-19 pandemic and related public health prevention measures have led to a disruption of the delivery of routine care and may have had an impact on the quality of diabetes care. Our aim in this study was to evaluate the extent to which structure, process and outcome quality measures in diabetes care changed in the first 6 months of the pandemic compared with previous periods.A before-and-after observational study of all community-living Ontario residents20 years of age and living with diabetes. The patients were divided into 3 cohorts: a pandemic cohort, alive March to September 2020 (n=1,393,404); reference cohort 1, alive March to September 2019 (n=1,415,490); and reference cohort 2, alive September 2019 to February 2020 (n=1,444,000). Outcome measures were in-person/virtual visits to general practitioners and specialists, eye examinations, glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) testing, filled prescriptions, and admissions to emergency departments (EDs) and hospitals for acute and chronic diabetes complications.The probability of an in-person visit to a GP decreasing by 47% (95% confidence interval [CI], 47% to 47%) in the pandemic period compared with both previous periods. The probability of having an eye exam was lower by 43% (95% CI, 44% to 43%), an A1C test by 28% (95% CI, 29% to 28%) and an LDL test by 31% (95% CI, 31% to 31%) in the pandemic period compared with the same 6-month period the year before. There were very small decreases in drug prescriptions and decreases of 18% and 16% in ED and hospital visits for complications.We observed disruptions to both structure and processes measures of diabetes care in Ontario during the first wave of the pandemic.