在地老化實踐、外在連續性與都市老人生活品質研究：以臺北市為例

Aging in Place Factors, External Continuity and Quality of Life among Older Adults in Cities: Taipei City Taken as an Example

10.6171/ntuswr.202212_(46).0003

蘇芩儀(Chin-Yi Su)；趙曉芳(Shiau-Fang Chao)

在地老化 ； 老年生活品質 ； 連續理論 ； 高齡友善城市 ； 路徑分析 ； aging in place ； quality of life ； continuity theory ； aging friendly cities ； path analysis

臺大社會工作學刊

46期（2022 / 12 / 01）

83 - 125

繁體中文

在地老化是1980年代以來各國普世的老人照護目標，被視為提升老年生活品質的關鍵。然而，目前國內缺少探討在地老化實踐如何影響都市老人生活品質的研究。本研究以居家安全性、生活自主性、社區環境高齡友善性三項指標作為在地老化實踐的測量。同時融合連續理論中的外在連續性，探索上述變項對都市長者生活品質的影響效果。本研究以調查研究法取得台北市253位60歲以上長者的問卷回覆，經確認量表信效度後，藉統計軟體SPSS與AMOS進行多元迴歸及中介效果路徑分析。研究發現居家安全、生活自主、社區環境友善性皆能提升生活品質，又以後兩項實踐的影響力更大。其次，都市長者的人際穩定性與活動連續性亦能提升生活品質，且在生活自主、社區環境友善對生活品質的影響之間具有中介效果。本研究認為，若欲展現在地老化積極意涵，則勿僅止避免長者入住機構，應關注其居家安全、生活自主、社區高齡友善環境的落實。重要的是，都市長者的外在連續性應被看見。社會工作專業應協助長者與熟悉的人事物和社區環境保有長期且持續的連結，同時，培力長者說出自己在都市空間的需求，以落實真正有生活品質的在地老化。

＂Aging in place＂ has long been a popular and desirable term in regard to improving quality of life (QOL) among older adults. However, most extant studies only focus on certain aspects instead of viewing aging in place inclusively from its three elemental definitions: being safe at home, maintaining autonomy, and enjoying an aging-friendly community. Furthermore, less is known about how continuity of daily lives potentially affects older adults' QOL. Integrating the Environmental Press Theory and the Continuity Theory, this study evaluates how aging in place elements and external continuity of city-dwelling older adults combine in affacting their quality of life. 253 adults aged 60 and above were recruited. The sample was not representative of community-dwelling older adults in Taipei city. A structed questionnaire was carried out either by paper-and-pencil or an online survey. The results showed that, firstly, home safety, autonomy and aging-friendly community all positively affect QOL, with the latter two elements having stronger effects. Secondly, the stability of personal relationships and activity continuity not only showed strong effects related to QOL, but also served as mediators between autonomy, aging-friendly community and QOL. This study urges that in putting aging in place into a more active practice, policy makers and social workers should not only evaluate the situation of home safety, autonomy and aging-friendly community of older adults, but also pay attention to their external continuity, which entails maintaining their long-term relationship with the local community and preserving their own daily routines. To achieve higher QOL among older adults, related organizations could be more proactive to empower older people to become agents of their own communities and city spaces.

1. 姚開屏, G.,錢承君, C.-C,張育誠, Y.-C.,林韋伶, W.-L.,王榮德, J.-D.,謝清麟, C.-L.,林茂榮, M.-R.(2017)。台灣版 WHOQOL-OLD 問卷之發展與驗證。臺灣公共衛生雜誌，36(3)，239-258。
   連結：
2. Ahn, M.,Kwon, H. J.,Kang, J.(2017).Supporting aging-in-place well: Findings from a cluster analysis of the reasons for aging-in-place and perceptions of well-being.Journal of Applied Gerontology,39(1),3-15.
3. Atchley, R. C.(1989).A continuity theory of normal aging.The Gerontological Society of America,29(2),183-190.
4. Atchley, R. C.(1999).Continuity and adaptation in aging: Creating positive experiences.Johns Hopkins University Press.
5. Baars, J.(Ed.),Dannefer, D.(Ed.),Phillipson, C.(Ed.),Walker, A.(Ed.)(2006).Aging, globalization and inequality.Baywood Publishing Company.
6. Beck, U.,Ritter, M.(trans.)(1998).Democracy Without Enemies.Cambridge:Polity Press.
7. Cattell, V.,Evans, M.(1999).Neighborhood images in East London: Social capital and social networks on two East London estates.Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
8. Choi, Y. J.(2020).Age-friendly features in home and community and the self-reported health and functional limitation of older adults: The role of supportive environments.Journal of Urban Health,97(4),471-485.
9. Chong, K. H.(Ed.),Cho, M.(Ed.)(2018).Creative ageing cities: Place design with older people in Asian cities.Routledge.
10. Clarke, P.,Gallagher, N. A.(2013).Optimizing mobility in later life: The role of the urban built environment for older adults aging in place.Journal of Urban Health,90(6),997-1009.
11. Cook, C. C.,Martin, P.,Yearns, M.,Damhorst, M. L.(2007).Attachment to “Place” and coping with losses in changed communities: A paradox for aging adults.Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal,35(3),201-214.
12. Evci, E. D.,Ergin, F.,Beşer, E.(2006).Home accidents in the elderly in Turkey.The Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine,209(4),291-301.
13. Gobbens, R. J. J.,van Assen, M. A. L. M.(2017).Associations of environmental factors with quality of life in older adults.The Gerontologist,58(1),101-110.
14. Golant, S. M.(2008).Commentary: Irrational exuberance for the aging in place of vulnerable low-income older homeowners.Journal of Aging & Social Policy,20(4),379-397.
15. Gustafson, P.(2001).Meanings of place: Everyday experiences and theoretical conceptualizations.Journal of Environmental Psychology,21(1),5-16.
16. Hertz, J. E.,Anschutz, C. A.(2002).Relationships among perceived enactment of autonomy, self-care, and holistic health in community-dwelling older adults.Journal of Holistic Nursing,20(2),166-186.
17. Hooper, D.,Coughlan, J.,Mullen, M.(2008).Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit.Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods,6(1),153-60.
18. Iecovich, E.(2014).Aging in place: From theory to practice.Anthropological Notebooks,20(1),21-32.
19. Lawton, M. P.(1991).A multidimensional view of quality of life in frail elders.The concept and measurement of quality of life in the frail elderly
20. Lawton, M. P.(1989).Environmental proactivity and affect in older people.The social psychology of aging
21. Lawton, M. P.,Simon, B.(1968).The ecology of social relationships in housing for the elderly.The Gerontologist,8(2),108-115.
22. Levasseur, M.,Dubois, M.-F.,Généreux, M.,Menec, V.,Raina, P.,Roy, M.,Gabaude, C.,Couturier, Y.,St-Pierre, C.(2017).Capturing how age-friendly communities foster positive health, social participation and health equity: A study protocol of key components and processes that promote population health in aging Canadians.BMC Public Health,17,502.
23. Mortazavi, H.,Tabatabaeichehr, M.,Taherpour, M.,Masoumi, M.(2018).Relationship between home safety and prevalence of falls and fear of falling among elderly people: A cross-sectional study.Materia Socio-Medica,30(2),103-107.
24. Ng, S.-I.,Lim, X.-J.,Hsu, H.-C.(2021).The importance of age-friendly city on older people’s continuity and life satisfaction.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,18(14),7252.
25. Oswald, F.,Jopp, D.,Rott, C.,Wahl, H.-W.(2011).Is aging in place a resource for or risk to life satisfaction?.The Gerontologist,51(2),238-250.
26. Rowles, G. D.(1993).Evolving images of place in aging and ‘aging in place’.Journal of the American Society on Aging,17(2),65-70.
27. Smith, A. E.(2009).Ageing in urban neighbourhoods: Place attachment and social exclusion.Policy Press.
28. United Nations(2017).World Population Ageing.
29. van Hoof, J.,Kazak, J. K.,Perek-Białas, J. M.,Peek, S. T. M.(2018).The challenges of urban ageing: Making cities age-friendly in Europe.International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
30. Wahl, H.-W.(Ed.),Brenner, H.(Ed.),Mollenkopf, H.(Ed.),Rothenbacher, D.(Ed.),Rott, C.(Ed.)(2006).The many faces of health, competence and well-being in old age: Integrating epidemiological, psychological and social perspectives.Netherlands.
31. Wahl, H.-W.,Iwarsson, S.,Oswald, F.(2012).Aging well and the environment: Toward an integrative model and research agenda for the future.The Gerontologist,52(3),306-316.
32. Wahl, H.-W.,Mollenkopf, H.,Oswald, F.,Claus, C.(2007).Environmental aspects of quality of life in old age: Conceptual and empirical issues.Quality of life in old age: International and multi-disciplinary perspectives
33. Weil, J.(2014).The new neighborhood senior center: Redefining social and service roles for the baby boom generation.Rutgers University Press.
34. WHO. (2006). WHOQOL-OLD manual. https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/51682098/whoqol-old-manual-library-college-of-public-health-sciences
35. WHO(2007).Global age-friendly cities: A guide.
36. 內政部戶政司（2020）。《縣市人口年齡結構指標》。https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346 【Department of Household Registration. (2020). Elderly population ratio in Taiwanese counties. https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/portal/346】
37. 王人卉, R.-H.,林儷蓉, L.-R(2016)。在地老化意涵與面向之分析：以臺灣六都高齡福利措施為例。休閒與社會研究，13，159-168。
38. 台北市社會局（2019）。《108 年臺北市老人生活狀況調查報告》。https://dosw.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=27AAE5ED6FF97B25&s=4242254277CAF25A 【Department of Social Welfare, Taipei City Government. (2019). 2019 Elderly life investigation in Taipei cities. https://dosw.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=27AAE5ED6FF97B25&s=4242254277CAF25A】
39. 台灣版世界衛生組織生活品質問卷發展小組=The Whoqol-Taiwan Group(2000)。台灣版世界衛生組織生活品質問卷之發展簡介。中華公共衛生雜誌，19(4)，315-324。
40. 吳淑瓊, S.-C,莊坤洋, K.-Y.(2001)。在地老化：台灣二十一世紀長期照護的政策方向。台灣公共衛生雜誌，20(3)，192-201。
41. 邱皓政, H.-C.(2010).量化研究與統計分析：SPSS 資料分析範例解析.五南=Wu-Nan Book.
42. 施麗紅, L.-H.(2019)。是保護還是傷害？老人長期照顧機構住民約束的倫理抉擇探究。台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，9(2)，53-112。
43. 國民健康署（2015）。中老年身心社會生活狀況長期追蹤調查成果報告。https://www.hpa.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=242&pid=1282 【Health Promotion Administration. (2015). Taiwan Longitudinal Study on Aging. https://www.hpa.gov.tw/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeid=242&pid=1282】
44. 郭登聰, T.-T.(2014)。建構「高齡友善城市」：從活躍老化到在地老化的重要課題－以社區照顧關懷據點為例。輔仁社會研究，4，1-42。
45. 陳曉梅, H.-M.,張宏哲, H.-J.(2007)。使用居家服務失能老人生活品質的現況及其影響因素之探討。長期照護雜誌，11(3)，247-265。
46. 黃珮玲, P.-L.(2016)。從社會發展觀點探討臺灣老人在社區安老的可能性。社區發展季刊，153，290-304。
47. 衛生福利部（2017b）。《台灣 9 成以上縣市推動高齡友善城市涵蓋比率國際之冠》。https://www.mohw.gov.tw/cp-3159-24140-1.html 【Health Promotion Administration. (2017). Over 90% of Taiwanese counties promoting aging friendly cities. https://www.mohw.gov.tw/cp-3159-24140-1.html】
48. 衛生福利部（2019）。《「長照 2.0 執行情形、困境及未來規劃」專案報告》。https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl-56429-31edfec1-68df-4de1-b30d-a2b214f68076.html 【Ministry of Health and Welfare. (2019). The report of long term 2.0. https://www.mohw.gov.tw/dl-53891-a30c6a62-26ad-4e63-a98d-ee80247e1d4e.html】
49. 衛生福利部（2017a）。《中華民國 106 年老人狀況調查報告》。https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/lp-1767-113.html 【Ministry of Health and Welfare. (2017). Report of the senior citizen condition survey 2017. https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOS/lp-1767-113.html】

1. (2024)。高齡在地老化執行概況之分析－以臺中市高齡服務為例。中國行政評論，30(1)，121-149。