Two wheels, better years? A systematic review on Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) outcomes in older cyclists

Le résumé fourni par la source

Population aging raises health and mobility issues that affect daily functioning and well-being. Cycling is a feasible, low-impact option in later life, but evidence on its physical and mental health effects in older adults remains fragmented. Aim This literature review study aimed to synthesize empirical evidence on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes of cycling among adults aged ≥65 years, with specific attention to physical and mental health, and to document reported risks or vulnerabilities. Methods Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (1990–2025) following PRISMA procedures. Inclusion was restricted to peer-reviewed journal articles in English reporting real-world cycling exposure among older adults. Study quality was appraised using design-appropriate tools (NOS, JBI, AMSTAR-2, CASP). Outcomes were grouped as physical health, mental health, and risks/vulnerabilities. Results Twenty-eight studies met eligibility. Most were quantitative and cross-sectional, with limited longitudinal or intervention designs, and were predominantly conducted in high-income settings. Sixteen studies reported physical health outcomes (e.g., better mobility, balance/leg strength, cardiometabolic markers), eleven addressed mental/psychosocial health (e.g., lower distress, higher life satisfaction and overall mental HRQoL; mixed findings for cognition/anxiety), and eight reported risks or vulnerabilities (e.g., greater injury severity with age, skill limitations in specific maneuvers, higher inhaled NO 2 relative to some modes, and safety/infrastructure concerns). Some studies reported multiple domains, leading to overlaps in these counts. Measurement approaches varied across studies. Conclusion Cycling in later life shows associations with improved functional capacity and selected mental health indicators, while participation and outcomes depend on safety perceptions, infrastructure, and demographic factors. Evidence would clearly benefit from further longitudinal and intervention studies, standardized outcome measures, and equity-focused analyses to inform age-friendly infrastructure, skills programs, and inclusive access to cycling.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.