Description

The Walking Route Audit Tool for Seniors (WRATS-6) is a systematic observational instrument developed to identify safe, accessible, functional, and pleasant walking routes for older adults. It can be used by researchers, healthcare professionals, urban planners, trained community members, and members of the general public.

The designation “WRATS-6” refers to the tool’s six principal assessment sections rather than to six individual items. The available version contains 59 items assessing route functionality, traffic safety, amenities, aesthetic characteristics, personal safety, and access to useful destinations.

Tool Analysis

WRATS-6 is completed during an on-site assessment of a predefined walking route, typically covering approximately 1,000–2,000 steps. Before beginning the audit, the evaluator records basic information, including the date, time, weather conditions, walking duration, step count, and the route’s starting and ending points.

The six assessment sections examine:

  • Route functionality, including the presence and condition of sidewalks, blocked pathways, steep inclines, construction work, and stairs.
  • Traffic safety, including pedestrian crossings, traffic signals, crossing time, traffic volume, road width, driver behavior, and curb height.
  • Route amenities, such as benches, sheltered areas, public toilets, drinking fountains, exercise stations, and public transport stops.
  • Attractive features, including trees, shade, gardens, green spaces, appealing buildings, shopfronts, artwork, and water features.
  • Personal safety, including street lighting, the presence of other pedestrians, litter, graffiti, threatening individuals, and uncontrolled animals.
  • Destinations, such as parks, shops, healthcare services, libraries, places of worship, friends’ homes, and senior or recreation centers.

Purpose

The primary purpose of WRATS-6 is to identify environmental characteristics that facilitate or obstruct walking among older adults. Its use can reveal infrastructure deficiencies that restrict accessibility, increase the risk of falls or injuries, or reduce an individual’s sense of safety.

The instrument can also support the selection of suitable routes for walking programs, community-based physical activity initiatives, and active-aging interventions. Safe and attractive walking environments can contribute to older adults’ autonomy, social participation, physical activity, and overall quality of life.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data are collected through direct observation while the evaluator walks along the selected route. To improve reliability, two independent evaluators may assess the same route under similar environmental and traffic conditions.

Analysis may include frequencies, percentages, domain-level scores, and comparisons between different routes, neighborhoods, or geographical areas. When multiple observers participate, inter-rater agreement should also be examined using appropriate reliability measures.

The findings can be used by local authorities, public health agencies, urban planners, healthcare professionals, community organizations, and older-adult advocacy groups. The results may inform interventions such as repairing sidewalks, removing obstacles, improving street lighting, creating safer pedestrian crossings, reducing traffic hazards, and installing benches, shelters, or shaded resting areas.

Scoring

WRATS-6 does not use a uniform five-point Likert scale. Most items are evaluated using three frequency categories, such as “never,” “sometimes,” and “often.” These categories generally correspond to the absence, occasional presence, or frequent presence of a particular environmental feature. Other items use dichotomous responses or numerical categories.

The direction of each item must be considered during scoring. Frequent availability of trees, shade, benches, or pedestrian crossings represents a positive characteristic. In contrast, broken sidewalks, blocked pathways, excessive traffic, steep inclines, or dangerous drivers represent negative characteristics. Negative items must therefore be reverse-coded before calculating any overall or domain-level scores.

Arbitrary cut-off points should not be used to classify a route as “good,” “poor,” or “unsafe” unless they have been empirically established for the population and context under investigation. Interpretation should preferably be based on the original scoring instructions and comparisons among the assessed routes.

Reliability and Limitations

The initial evaluation of WRATS examined agreement between independent observers. Findings supported its reliability for recording environmental characteristics relevant to older adults’ walking, although some sections were identified as requiring further refinement and validation.

The tool records the conditions observed at a specific time. Weather, time of day, seasonal changes, temporary construction work, lighting conditions, and traffic volume may affect the results. Repeated assessments may therefore be necessary to obtain a more representative evaluation.

WRATS-6 assesses characteristics of the walking environment and should not be treated as a clinical or diagnostic instrument. Moreover, a translated version should undergo appropriate linguistic and cultural adaptation before being used in research or formal assessment.

Practical Applications

WRATS-6 may be used in public health research, urban and transport planning, occupational therapy, gerontology, community health promotion, and age-friendly city initiatives. It may also support geographical mapping of walking barriers and the prioritization of interventions in neighborhoods with large populations of older residents.

By systematically documenting both supportive features and environmental barriers, the instrument can contribute to evidence-based decisions concerning pedestrian accessibility, injury prevention, active mobility, and healthy aging.

References

Kerr, J., Carlson, J. A., Rosenberg, D. E., & Withers, A. (2012). Identifying and promoting safe walking routes in older adults. Health, 4(9), 720–724.

Kerr, J., & Rosenberg, D. E. (2009). Walking Route Audit Tool for Seniors (WRATS).

Rosenberg, D. E., Kerr, J., Sallis, J. F., Patrick, K., Moore, D. J., & King, A. C. (2009). Feasibility and outcomes of a multilevel place-based walking intervention for seniors: A pilot study. Health & Place, 15(1), 173–179.

Rosenberg, D. E., Kerr, J., Sallis, J. F., Patrick, K., Norman, G. J., & Calfas, K. (2012). Promoting walking among older adults living in retirement communities. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity, 20(3), 379–394.