An Investigation of ADA Compliance of Aquatic Facilities in the North Texas Area

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilary Pike ◽  
Joseph Walker ◽  
John Collins ◽  
Jan Hodges

Purpose. The study expands research on accessibility, comparing compliance scores of aquatic facilities in North Texas built before the 1991 Title III Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) with facilities built after the 1991 ADAAG and the proposed 2002 supplement. Design. A quasi-experimental design directed the selection of 52 facilities where measurements were taken to determine compliance with ADAAG and the supplement. A focus group provided insight into interpreting which features functioned as barriers or constraints to participation. Setting. Metropolitan statistical area in North Texas. Subjects. A total of 52 aquatic facilities and 12 focus group participants (University of North Texas institutional review board 07–283). Measure. ADA aquatic facility compliance instrument. Analysis. Frequency, ratios. Results. No facilities were 100% ADA compliant overall, although some facilities were 100% compliant with specific structural domains. Women's restrooms rated lowest (average = 55%), and men's restrooms received the second lowest rating (average = 64%). Focus group results indicated that improperly designed restrooms and pool entries are primary barriers to participation. Conclusion. The findings support a need for stronger enforcement of policies that improve accessibility of facilities. Architectural reviews and construction practices need to be improved. The structural barriers and constraints identified can be limiting factors in efforts aimed at increasing physical activity among individuals with disabilities and individuals with physical limitations.

2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (3) ◽  
pp. iii-x

The next issue, that of November 2012, will be the last for the “UCLA” team—which now includes Harvard, Ohio State, and Stanford—as (now former) co-editors of APSR. The new University of North Texas (UNT) editors are already receiving all papers submitted after June 30, 2012 (at the rate of almost twenty per week, John Ishiyama tells us) while we are handling the “conditional accepts” and “revise and resubmits” that were in the pipeline and have invited referees for the submissions that arrived through June 30. So far, all seems to be running smoothly at both ends, for which we express our gratitude to Aries (which runs Editorial Manager), to the North Texas editorial team, and especially to the professionals who make the whole enterprise run—Joseph Riser, who has served as a superb senior editor at UCLA—and his successor at UNT, Meagan Williams.


2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigrid S. Glenn ◽  
Shahla Ala'i-Rosales

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S302-S303
Author(s):  
Hala Saad ◽  
Kruti Yagnik ◽  
Helen King ◽  
Roger Bedimo ◽  
Richard J Medford

Abstract Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, rapid Infectious Diseases (ID) consultation has been required to answer novel questions regarding SARS-CoV-2 testing and infection prevention. We sought to evaluate the utility of e-consults to triage and provide rapid ID recommendations to providers. Methods We performed a retrospective study reviewing ID e-consults in three institutions in the North Texas region: Clements University Hospital (CUH), Parkland Hospital and Health System (PHHS), and the VA North Texas Health Care System (VA) from March 1, 2020 to May 15, 2020. Variables collected include age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, time to completion, reason for consult and outcome of consult (initiation or removal of personal protective equipment (PPE) and recommendation to test or retest for COVID-19). Results We performed all analysis using R studio (Version 1.3.959). Characteristics of 198 patients included: 112(57%) male, 86(43%) female, 86(43%) Caucasian, 71(36%) Hispanic, 42(21%) African American, 6(3%) Asian and mean(sd) age of 55.1(15.9). Patient comorbidities included: 89(45%) with a heart condition, 77(39%) diabetes, 30(15%) asthma and 14(7%) liver disease. Median time to completion for all hospitals was 4 hours(h); ((CUH (4h) vs PHHS (2h), p< 0.05; VA (5.5h) vs PHHS (2h) p< 0.05)). Most common reasons for e-consult included: (63)32% regarding re-testing ((CUH 14(21%) vs PHHS 43(50%), p< 0.05; CUH vs VA 14(27%), p< 0.05; PHHS vs VA, p< 0.05)), (61)31% testing ((CUH 25(37%) vs PHHS 39(45%), p< 0.05; CUH vs VA 7(16%), p< 0.05; PHHS vs VA, p< 0.05)) and 61(31%) infection prevention (IP). Based on the e-consult recommendation, 53(27%) of patients were tested ((CUH 31(45%) vs PHHS 11(13%), p< 0.05, CUH vs VA 11(25%), PHHS vs VA, p< 0.05)), 45(23%) were re-tested, 44(22%) of patients had PPE started on and 19% had PPE removed ((CUH 0(0%) vs PHHS 16(19%), p< 0.05; CUH vs VA 21(48%), p< 0.05; PHHS vs VA, p< 0.05)). Reason for Consult Conclusion E-consult services can provide prompt ID input during the COVID-19 pandemic, minimizing the risk of infection to the patient and health care workers while preserving PPE and testing supplies. Disclosures Roger Bedimo, MD, MS, Gilead Sciences (Consultant)Merck & Co. (Advisor or Review Panel member)ViiV Healthcare (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)


2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 782-782
Author(s):  
Bert N. Uchino ◽  
John M. Ruiz ◽  
Timothy W. Smith ◽  
Joshua M. Smyth ◽  
Daniel J. Taylor ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document