Kerstin Nilsson1, Anna Rignell Hydbom, Lars Rylander. 1. Department of Work Science, Economic & Environmental Psychology, Swedish University Agricultural Science, Box 88, 23053 Alnarp, Sweden. kerstin.nilsson@slu.se
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors within nine identified areas that influence why some older workers want to (or believe they can) work until age 65 years or beyond, whereas others leave the workforce earlier. METHODS: The questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study included 1792 respondents aged 55-64 years, employed in the healthcare sector in Sweden. Using logistic regression, we investigated the associations between statements within nine areas and two outcome measures: (i) whether the individual wanted to work until age 65 years or beyond and (ii) whether the individual believed they can work until age 65 years or beyond. RESULTS: Of the 1792 respondents, 54% stated that they "can" and 38% that they "want to" work until age 65 years or beyond. Three areas were significantly associated with both these outcomes: worker health, economic incentives, and retirement decisions by life partners or close friends. Mental and physical working environment, work pace and skills/competence were associated with the "can" outcome, whereas work as an important part of life, working time, and management attitude to older workers were associated with the "want to" outcome. CONCLUSION: Although there were differences regarding the associations between six of the areas and the two outcomes (ie, "can" and "want to" go on working until age 65 years or beyond), three of the areas were important to both outcomes. Among those, it was interesting that life partner or close social environment gave higher odds ratios than for example health, physical work environment, or work satisfaction.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate factors within nine identified areas that influence why some older workers want to (or believe they can) work until age 65 years or beyond, whereas others leave the workforce earlier. METHODS: The questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study included 1792 respondents aged 55-64 years, employed in the healthcare sector in Sweden. Using logistic regression, we investigated the associations between statements within nine areas and two outcome measures: (i) whether the individual wanted to work until age 65 years or beyond and (ii) whether the individual believed they can work until age 65 years or beyond. RESULTS: Of the 1792 respondents, 54% stated that they "can" and 38% that they "want to" work until age 65 years or beyond. Three areas were significantly associated with both these outcomes: worker health, economic incentives, and retirement decisions by life partners or close friends. Mental and physical working environment, work pace and skills/competence were associated with the "can" outcome, whereas work as an important part of life, working time, and management attitude to older workers were associated with the "want to" outcome. CONCLUSION: Although there were differences regarding the associations between six of the areas and the two outcomes (ie, "can" and "want to" go on working until age 65 years or beyond), three of the areas were important to both outcomes. Among those, it was interesting that life partner or close social environment gave higher odds ratios than for example health, physical work environment, or work satisfaction.
Authors: Karen M Oude Hengel; Birgitte M Blatter; Goedele A Geuskens; Lando L J Koppes; Paulien M Bongers Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Wendy Koolhaas; Jac J L van der Klink; Johanna P M Vervoort; Michiel R de Boer; Sandra Brouwer; Johan W Groothoff Journal: J Occup Rehabil Date: 2013-06
Authors: Johanna Stengård; Marianna Virtanen; Constanze Leineweber; Hugo Westerlund; Hui-Xin Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Iris van der Heide; Rogier M van Rijn; Suzan J W Robroek; Alex Burdorf; Karin I Proper Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Astrid de Wind; Goedele A Geuskens; Kerstin G Reeuwijk; Marjan J Westerman; Jan Fekke Ybema; Alex Burdorf; Paulien M Bongers; Allard J van der Beek Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Erica E M Maurits; Anke J E de Veer; Lucas S van der Hoek; Anneke L Francke Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Suzan J W Robroek; Anne Rongen; Coos H Arts; Ferdy W H Otten; Alex Burdorf; Merel Schuring Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 3.240