Search

People with mobility impairment have the right to live in accessible housing that meets their needs. Although the Australian National Construction Code for residential housing will be amended to include minimum accessibility standards in September 2022, some states have chosen not to adopt these standards (New South Wales, Western Australia and South Australia). The inclusion of people with lived experience in decisions surrounding accessible housing design is lacking. This study sought the perspective of people with mobility impairment on the most important modifications they would make to the design of their own homes, and the homes of their friends and family, to make them more accessible. An online survey was completed from February to March 2021 by 145 people living in Australia including 112 people with mobility impairment, and 33 family members. Results indicated that 71 per cent of the participants were living in housing that did not fully meet their accessibility needs. Descriptive qualitative analyses demonstrated that commonly reported modifications included a step-free entrance, wider internal doors and corridors, and level access throughout the home. These modifications would promote social inclusion, functioning, independence and overall quality of life. These results have policy implications for the implementation of accessibility standards in the National Construction Code.

Background: Despite the number of older people and people with disabilities increasing in Australia, it is unclear which housing design features are needed to support physical housing accessibility for people with and without disabilities across the lifespan. Objective: This study drew upon the experience of occupational therapists to investigate accessible housing design features and home modifications to support aging in place and discharge from hospital to home. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey exploring housing design features and home modifications was completed by 144 Australian occupational therapists over six weeks in 2021. Descriptive quantitative and qualitative data analyses were used. Results: For both aging in place and hospital discharge, the most important housing design features included step-free access to the dwelling, large step-free showers, and bathroom and bedroom space on the ground floor. Qualitative findings also highlighted the importance of preparing for home modifications, such as reinforcing bathroom walls to support the post-build installation of grab rails. The most frequently needed modifications were for bathroom features, while structural changes to the dwelling were the most time-intensive modifications, requiring more than six weeks to be completed. Conclusions: External access to the home and internal access to bedroom and bathroom facilities can support aging in place and hospital discharge and mitigate the need for costly and time-intensive home modifications. While this study was conducted in Australia, the findings have relevance outside of this context, and are important for ensuring equitable accessibility for people with and without disabilities across the lifespan.