Indicators and determinants of the years of working life lost: a narrative review

Abstract

Objective: This narrative review summarizes the available indicators for working life expectancy and years of working life lost (YWLL) and their determinants. Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase databases from their inception until August 2020 and screened all studies proposing an indicator for working life expectancy or YWLL. We also reviewed studies focusing on sociodemographic, lifestyle and work-related determinants of working life expectancy and YWLL. The results were synthesized narratively. Results: We identified 13 different indicators for the length of working life or YWLL. The most frequently used indicators were ‘working life expectancy’, ‘healthy working life expectancy’, and YWLL. Working life expectancy and healthy working life expectancy are longer for men than women. Working life expectancy at the age of 50 has been increasing since the mid-90s, and the increase has been larger for women, reducing the sex difference. Working life is shorter for people with a low level of education, in lower occupational classes, for people exposed to high physical work demands, those living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas, people with overweight or obesity, smokers, people who are inactive during leisure time and in people with a chronic health problem. Conclusions: Despite increasing interest in understanding the determinants of YWLL, only a few studies have simultaneously considered multiple exit routes from the labour market. We propose a new measure for total YWLL considering all relevant exit routes from employment. This comprehensive measure can be used to assess the effect of given policy changes on prolonging working life.

Changes in healthy and unhealthy working-life expectancy over the period 2002–17: a population-based study in people aged 51–65 years in 14 OECD countries

“…We chose this measure over the presence of health problems that limit the kind or amount of work, although the latter measure was often used in previous studies to assess healthy and unhealthy working-life expectancy. 14 There are two reasons for this choice. First, the assessment of chronic diseases is less prone to cultural bias in reporting behaviour, which can have a large influence on international comparisons such as that done in this study.…”

“…These measures include self-rated health, the presence of health problems that limit the kind or amount of work, clinical evaluation of work capacity, and the presence of chronic diseases. 13,14 Comparisons of levels of self-rated health between countries are subject to bias because of cultural differences in reporting behaviour. For example, a large share of the variation in self-assessed health among European countries was shown to be caused by variation in reporting styles among respondents.…”

Gender, education, and cohort differences in healthy working life expectancy at age 50 years in Australia: a longitudinal analysis

“…Similarly, we defined work by current employment status, consistent with definitions applied to ELSA 25 and commentary arguing for work expectancy to include all workforce exit routes. 34 However, it is common among studies of work expectancy to define work in terms of economic activity, which distinguishes between those in the labour force (both employed or unemployed) and who are unavailable to work due to retirement or other circumstances. 11 Neither approach captures phases of retirement transitioning or reductions in working hours.…”

The influence of chronic diseases and poor working conditions in working life expectancy across educational levels among older employees in the Netherlands

“…Another limitation concerns a lack of power to distinguish specific underlying pathways of exit from paid employment or to investigate the influence of specific chronic diseases on WLE and WYL. As also concluded in a recent narrative review (32), it would be of interest to further disentangle unemployment and disability benefits as to their contribution to the differences in WYL for workers with chronic diseases or workers exposed to unfavorable working conditions. In addition, it would be of interest to take into account the accumulation of exposures to working conditions and chronic diseases over time.…”