Aging Research Center, Karolinska Institutet and Stockholm University, Sweden.
Center for Health Sciences, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland; National Center of Competence in Research "Overcoming Vulnerability: Life Course Perspectives", Switzerland.
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Apr;226:77-86. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.02.026. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
Many countries are raising the age of pension eligibility because of increases in life expectancy. Given the social gradient in life expectancy and health, it is important to understand the potential late-life health effects of prolonging working life and whether any effects differ by socioeconomic position. We examined the effect of prolonging working life beyond age 65 on mortality and a series of indicators of late-life physical health (the ability to climb stairs without difficulty, self-rated health, ADL limitations, and musculoskeletal pain) in a representative sample of the Swedish population. In addition to average effects, we also examined heterogeneous effects, for instance by occupational social class. To do this, we use propensity score matching, a method suitable for addressing causality in observational data. The data came from two linked Swedish longitudinal surveys based on nationally representative samples with repeated follow-ups; The Swedish Level of Living Survey and the Swedish Panel Study of Living conditions of the Oldest Old, and from national income and mortality registries. The analytical sample for the mortality outcome included 1852 people, and for late-life physical health outcomes 1461 people. We found no significant average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) of working to age 66 or above on the outcomes, measured an average of 12 years after retirement: mortality (ATT -0.039), the ability to climb stairs (ATT -0.023), self-rated health (ATT -0.009), ADL limitations (ATT -0.023), or musculoskeletal pain (ATT -0.009) in late life. Analyses of whether the results varied by occupational social class or the propensity to prolong working life were inconclusive but suggest a positive effect of prolonging working life on health outcomes. Accordingly, more detailed knowledge about the precise mechanisms underlying these results are needed. In conclusion, working to age 66 or above did not have effect on mortality or late-life physical health.
许多国家都在提高养老金领取年龄，这是因为预期寿命延长了。鉴于预期寿命和健康方面存在社会梯度，了解延长工作寿命对晚年健康的潜在影响，以及这些影响是否因社会经济地位而异，这一点很重要。我们研究了在瑞典代表性人群中，将工作寿命延长至 65 岁以上对死亡率以及一系列晚年身体健康指标（无困难地爬楼梯的能力、自评健康、ADL 限制和肌肉骨骼疼痛）的影响。除了平均效应外，我们还研究了异质效应，例如通过职业社会阶层。为此，我们使用倾向评分匹配，这是一种适用于解决观察性数据因果关系的方法。数据来自两个基于全国代表性样本的瑞典纵向调查，这些样本具有重复的随访，即瑞典生活水平调查和瑞典最老年人群生活条件面板研究，以及国家收入和死亡率登记处。死亡率结果的分析样本包括 1852 人，晚年身体健康结果的分析样本包括 1461 人。我们没有发现工作到 66 岁或以上对这些结果的平均处理效果（ATT）有显著影响，这些结果是在退休平均 12 年后测量的：死亡率（ATT -0.039）、爬楼梯的能力（ATT -0.023）、自评健康（ATT -0.009）、ADL 限制（ATT -0.023）或肌肉骨骼疼痛（ATT -0.009）。分析结果是否因职业社会阶层或延长工作寿命的倾向而有所不同，结果并不明确，但表明延长工作寿命对健康结果有积极影响。因此，需要更详细地了解这些结果背后的确切机制。总之，工作到 66 岁或以上对死亡率或晚年身体健康没有影响。
