Background We investigated associations for long working hours in relation to physical inactivity and high-level physical activity among middle-aged and older adults.
Methods Our study included 5402 participants and 21 595 observations from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Ageing (2006–2020). Logistic mixed models were used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs. Physical inactivity was defined as not engaging in any type of physical activity, while high-level physical activity was defined as engaging in ≥150 min per week of physical activity.
Results Working >40 hours weekly was positively related to physical inactivity (OR (95% CI) 1.48 (1.35 to 1.61)) and negatively related to high-level physical activity (0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79)). Exposure to long working hours consecutively for ≥3 waves was associated with the highest OR for physical inactivity (1.62 (95% CI 1.42 to 1.85)) and the lowest OR for high-level physical activity (0.71 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.82)). Furthermore, compared with persistent short working hours (≤40 hours → ≤40 hours), long working hours in a previous wave (>40 hours → ≤40 hours) were associated with a higher OR of physical inactivity (1.28 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.49)). Exposure to an increase in working hours (≤40 hours → >40 hours) was also associated with a higher OR of physical inactivity (1.53 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.82)).
Conclusion We found that having working long hours was associated with a higher risk of physical inactivity and a lower likelihood of high-level physical activity. Moreover, accumulation of long working hours was associated with a higher risk of physical inactivity.
- OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
- LONGITUDINAL STUDIES
- PUBLIC HEALTH
Data availability statement
Data are available in a public, open access repository. The rawdata are publicly available (https://survey.keis.or.kr/eng/index.jsp).
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors Conceptualisation: S-UB and J-UW; methodology, S-UB; formal analysis, S-UB; Investigation: S-UB, W-TL, M-SK and M-HL; writing—original draft preparation, S-UB; writing—review and editing, J-HY and J-UW; supervision, J-HY, W-TL, M-SK, M-HL, J-UW and J-HY. All authors provided substantial critical input to improve the manuscript, and all authors approved the final draft. J-UW is responsible for the overall content as guarantor.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.