Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jul 9;50(3):841-851.
doi: 10.1093/ije/dyaa271.

Healthy ageing for all? Comparisons of socioeconomic inequalities in health expectancies over two decades in the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies I and II

Holly Q Bennett  1 , Andrew Kingston  1 , Gemma Spiers  1 , Louise Robinson  1 , Lynne Corner  1 , Clare Bambra  1 , Carol Brayne  2 , Fiona E Matthews  1 , Carol Jagger  1
Affiliations

Healthy ageing for all? Comparisons of socioeconomic inequalities in health expectancies over two decades in the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies I and II

Holly Q Bennett et al. Int J Epidemiol. .

Abstract

Background: Despite increasing life expectancy (LE), cross-sectional data show widening inequalities in disability-free LE (DFLE) by socioeconomic status (SES) in many countries. We use longitudinal data to better understand trends in DFLE and years independent (IndLE) by SES, and how underlying transitions contribute.

Methods: The Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies (CFAS I and II) are large population-based studies of those aged ≥65 years in three English centres (Newcastle, Nottingham, Cambridgeshire), with baseline around 1991 (CFAS I, n = 7635) and 2011 (CFAS II, n = 7762) and 2-year follow-up. We defined disability as difficulty in activities of daily living (ADL), dependency by combining ADLs and cognition reflecting care required, and SES by area-level deprivation. Transitions between disability or dependency states and death were estimated from multistate models.

Results: Between 1991 and 2011, gains in DFLE at age 65 were greatest for the most advantaged men and women [men: 4.7 years, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 3.3-6.2; women: 2.8 years, 95% CI 1.3-4.3]. Gains were due to the most advantaged women having a reduced risk of incident disability [relative risk ratio (RRR):0.7, 95% CI 0.5-0.8], whereas the most advantaged men had a greater likelihood of recovery (RRR: 1.8, 95% CI 1.0-3.2) and reduced disability-free mortality risk (RRR: 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.6]. Risk of death from disability decreased for least advantaged men (RRR: 0.7, 95% CI 0.6-0.9); least advantaged women showed little improvement in transitions. IndLE patterns across time were similar.

Conclusions: Prevention should target the most disadvantaged areas, to narrow inequalities, with clear indication from the most advantaged that reduction in poor transitions is achievable.

Keywords: Life expectancy; dependency; deprivation; disability; health expectancy; social class.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Life expectancy, disability-free life expectancy, life expectancy with disability, and age when years with and without disability are equal (DFLE50%) for men and women in the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies (CFAS I and CFAS II)
Figure 2
Figure 2
Disability-free life expectancy, life expectancy with disability, and percentage of life expectancy spent disability-free (DFLE%) at age 65 for men and women across socioeconomic status groups in the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies (CFAS I and CFAS II)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Life expectancy, disability-free life expectancy, life expectancy with disability, and age when years with and without disability are equal (DFLE50%) for men and women in the Cognitive Function and Ageing Studies (CFAS I and CFAS II), by socioeconomic status group
Figure 4
Figure 4
Life expectancy, independent life expectancy, life expectancy with dependency, and age when years with and without dependency are equal (IndLE50%) for men and women in the Cognitive Function Ageing Studies (CFAS I and CFAS II), by socioeconomic status group
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Robine J-M, Jagger C, Crimmins EM, Saito Y, van Oyen H, Trends in health expectancies. In: Jagger C, Crimmins EC, Saito Y. et al. (eds). International Handbook of Health Expectancies. Basel, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2020,19–34.
    1. Pérès K, Edjolo A, Dartigues J-F, Barberger-Gateau P.. Recent trends in disability-free life expectancy in the French elderly. twenty years follow-up of the Paquid cohort. Ann RevGerontol Geriatr 2013;33:293–311.
    1. Cambois E, Blachier A, Robine JM.. Aging and health in France: an unexpected expansion of disability in mid-adulthood over recent years. Eur J Public Health 2013;23:575–81. - PubMed
    1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Changes in Life Expectancy and Disability in Australia 1998 to 2009. 11th edn. Canberra: AIHW, 2012.
    1. Jagger C, Matthews FE, Wohland P. et al. A comparison of health expectancies over two decades in England: results of the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study I and II. Lancet 2016;387:779–86. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types