1 Introduction

Population ageing has increased in the general population (United Nations 2019), and this is now challenging the workforce and the concept of ageing (Rašticová et al. 2023). For example, in the EU27 there were 90.5 million older people aged 65+ living at the start of 2019 and this equated to approximately one-fifth (20.3%) of the total population (Eurostat 2020). This demographic shift presents challenges for healthcare systems, pension systems, and labour markets, for families and communities (United Nations 2019), as well as for what is important for quality of working life of older workers. Consequently, this has brought the opportunity to debate for the extending of working life and its challenges (Ogg and Rašticová 2020) that comprises the need to understand increased life expectancy, how to age and work healthier (Christensen et al. 2009) beyond the traditional retirement age of 65 (Weiss et al. 2022). These challenges are specific to quality of working life that encompasses physical, psychological, social, and environmental dimensions (Post 2014). Quality of life serves as an important indicator of well-being, linked to various positive outcomes such as job satisfaction, health, and overall life satisfaction (Park 2004). Moreover, the impact of work–family conflict on the quality of work life cannot be overlooked (Hammer and Zimmerman 2011), underscoring the dynamic and evolving nature of the quality of working life as a theoretical framework. For older workers, quality of life holds particular significance, given the unique challenges they encounter in the workplace (Peterson and Spiker 2005), including ageism, increased physical limitations, and the need to balance work and caregiving responsibilities (Boudiny 2013).

Furthermore, as the workforce continues to diversify in terms of age, it becomes imperative to assess the role of technology in enhancing the experience and well-being of older employees, recognizing its potential as a key component of their quality of working life (Rašticová et al. 2022, 2023). For example, regarding the quality of working life, the role of technology should be researched for various complex factors shaping the lives of employees in the workplace, including aspects like overall quality of life, mastery, fellowship, values, and occupational risk (de Jong et al. 2015; de Lira et al. 2021; Ventegodt et al. 2008). Technological tools and advancements are recognized as crucial tools for work, irrespective of age, prompting an exploration into how technology can affect the quality of working life. Notably, preliminary research suggests that technostress is a significant factor affecting the quality of working life for older workers (Rašticová et al. 2022, 2023), presenting both challenges and opportunities if managed effectively within organizations.

In recent years, technology has transformed our lives, becoming an integral part of our daily routines, including at work. Technology, broadly defined as the application of knowledge, techniques, and systems for practical purposes, can be categorized as analog or digital (LaMeres 2017). Analog technologies refer to specific tools operating on continuous frequencies that enhance quality of life, such as old-style radios and certain sensors. In contrast, digital technologies encompass data manipulation, storage, transmission, and processing in digital formats, enabling dynamic improvements in quality of life through web-based platforms, smartphones, computers, digital cameras, and more. Furthermore, technological tools are classified based on their use, including communication tools, productivity tools, data analysis tools, cloud computing tools, and artificial intelligence. It is important to note that the impact of technology extends beyond younger generations, significantly influencing the quality of life for older workers (Murciano-Hueso et al. 2022).

This influence on the quality of life among older workers is a vital issue, given their substantial representation in the workforce, despite often being overlooked in discussions of technological advancements (i.e. internet, e-mail, ICT, computer, video-conferencing, and mobile phone; Damant et al. 2017). The adoption of digital technology, including everyday tools like smartphones, has ushered in considerable changes in the workplace, enhancing efficiency, communication speed, and flexibility (Andrews et al. 2019). For instance, technology can offer older workers greater flexibility and opportunities to work from home, potentially improving their overall quality of life (Pit et al. 2021). However, there remains an ongoing debate about the nature of the human–technology interaction and its effects, whether positive or negative. Research indicates that this phenomenon warrants analysis through mixed methodologies due to its complex conceptualization, particularly in the context of technostress and technological change within organizations (i.e. technostress and technological change in organizations; Pouloudi et al. 1999; Sellberg and Susi 2014). While some early studies emphasized reduced mental strain for digital tool users (Rodriguez and Pattini 2011), others have highlighted the efficient adoption of digital tools, even among so-called “low-level” workers (DiBello and Missildine 2010). Recent findings suggest that information technology and individual-level cultural dimensions can trigger technostress among employees (Ma and Turel 2019). In sum, technology can facilitate communication and collaboration, potentially enhancing job satisfaction and reducing social isolation (Chen and Schulz 2016).

The purpose of this integrative literature review is to describe how the use of technology in older workers can affect their quality of life and how technological tools improve the quality of working life among older workers. By examining a wide range of scholarly articles, research studies, and expert analysis, this review seeks to emphasize how technology is involved in quality of the working life of older workers.

2 Methods

The research used a descriptive method, an integrative literature review, allowing us to gain new knowledge about the research problem through reviewing, critiquing, and synthesizing the studied literature (Torraco 2016) under PRISMA guidelines (Page et al. 2021). An integrative literature review is a specific review method that summarizes past empirical or theoretical literature to provide a greater comprehensive understanding of a particular phenomenon or healthcare problem (Broome 1993) and allows the inclusion of multiple methodologies to capture the context, processes, and subjective elements of studies addressing a problem (Whittemore and Knafl 2005). Specifically, we used integrative literature review to critique and synthesize representative literature for quality of working life for older workers, and to draw insight on what are the dimension of this phenomenon for older workers when technological tools are involved (Elsbach and Kinppenberg 2018). This method is different than usual systematic reviews through underlining what arises from the review, rather than guide the review (Elsbach and Kinppenberg 2020). Finally, we focus on the theoretical framework for quality of working life for older workers by synthesizing the existing empirical research (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram of the review process (Page et al. (2021)

Full size image

The literature search included bibliographic-catalogue databases Web of Science (Web of Science Core Collection, BIOSIS Citation Index, Current Contents Connect, Data Citation Index, Derwent Innovations Index, KCI- Korean Journal Database, Medline, and Russian Science Citation Index), PubMed, and Scopus. When searching the literature, we considered inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1). Regarding age, the European criteria define the older workforce as those employees aged 55 and over (European Commission 2015), although some authors define older workers as those aged 45 and over (McCarthy et al. 2014). We chose 50 years old as a cut-off point, but this criterion is flexible.

Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Full size table

To search for literature in English, we used the following keywords in different combinations: older worker*, older employees, quality of working life, and technology. Keywords were combined with Boolean operators (AND and OR) into different combinations (Table 2). The literature search ran until 6 April 2023. We selected evidence that was published in credible and international journals that were peer-reviewed. This was one of the inclusion criteria.

Table 2 Search strategy with Boolean logical operators
Full size table

3 Literature review

The expanding body of scholarly literature about older employees, particularly those aged 50 and over, provides a comprehensive analysis of the various complexities associated with their experiences, encompassing both obstacles and prospects. This research focuses on significant topics, such as the influence of technology and technostress, the effects on health and well-being, age-related discrimination, and the importance of ergonomic design.

The literature evaluated in this study predominantly employs a quantitative research approach to investigate several aspects of older employees’ job experiences, encompassing health, work-life balance, and technological stress. A recurring and significant theme within the body of literature is the concept of technostress. In their study, Le Roux and Botha (2021) investigated the relationship between technostress and life happiness in the context of industrial workers. Their findings provide evidence for the significant impact of technostress on life satisfaction, confirming its psychological significance. Similarly, Nimrod (2018) focussed on the demographic of elderly internet users in Israel and highlighted the significance of technostress as a prominent concern. The study identifies five stressors that contribute to heightened levels of technostress, drawing upon the works of Le Roux and Botha (2021) and Nimrod (2018). The cumulative findings from these studies indicate that individuals in the elder workforce are susceptible to experiencing psychological stressors resulting from using technology.

Another noteworthy area of study centres around the physical and mental well of elderly employees. Konstantoulas et al. (2020) conducted a study that presents a technology evaluation tool capable of establishing a consistent correlation with the self-reported health indicators of older workers. The study conducted by Cook et al. (2015) found that behavioural modification interventions have a beneficial impact on the overall well-being of older office workers in the USA. In a supplementary investigation, Borle et al. (2021) observed that the use of information and communication technology (ICT) by older employees does not have a detrimental effect on their mental well-being or ability to do job tasks (Konstantoulas et al. 2020; Cook et al. 2015; Borle et al. 2021).

The workplace also emphasizes ergonomic factors for elderly workers. In their study, Gonzales and Morer (2016) presented a critical analysis of the ergonomic design elements, asserting that the absence of standardized tool adjustments leads to the inadequate implementation of ergonomic interventions (Gonzales and Morer 2016). The findings of their study suggest that the factors related to workplace design are crucial, however frequently disregarded, or improperly implemented.

In addition, several research studies focus on subsets of the elderly workforce and specific circumstances. Koreshi and Alpass (2022) conducted a study that specifically examines the influence of arthritis on the workability and quality of life of older employees in New Zealand. Their research findings highlight this medical condition’s negative effects on this population. Yin et al. (2021) documented a study that shows a somewhat modest, nevertheless favourable psychological and health outcome among older Latino persons who engage in a community program (Koreshi and Alpass 2022; Yin et al. 2021).

It is important to note that some of these studies utilize a cross-sectional research strategy. The significance of this matter lies in the limitations of cross-sectional research, which, although valuable for examining relationships at a specific moment, cannot establish causality or observe temporal variations. The investigation conducted by Le Roux and Botha (2021) provide insight into the correlation between technostress and life satisfaction. However, it does not comprehensively analyse how this relationship has evolved. Future longitudinal research could address this gap by examining the progression of this relationship.

Furthermore, the emphasis on older employees, particularly those aged 50 and above, corresponds with the general trend of an increasingly ageing labour force. However, a significant portion of the existing research would greatly benefit from incorporating intersectional perspectives, which consider the interplay between age and other factors such as gender, race, and socio-economic position. The study conducted by Koreshi and Alpass (2022) examines older workers with arthritis, providing valuable insight into how co-morbidities might interact with age to influence the work environment.

Finally, it should be noted that although most of the studies conducted thus far have employed quantitative research methods, incorporating qualitative approaches has the potential to enhance the comprehensiveness, subtlety, and contextual understanding that numerical data alone may fail to portray. The psychological study conducted by Yin et al. (2021) presents an opportunity for future qualitative investigations to delve into the psychological and emotional intricacies that may not be captured through merely quantitative assessments.

In summary, the existing literature on older employees encompasses a multifaceted landscape of concerns, encompassing technostress, physical and mental health, age-based prejudice, and the design of work environments. Although there exists a predominance of quantitative research, these studies collectively provide a comprehensive perspective on the various possibilities and problems that older employees currently experience (Tables 3, 4).

Table 3 Design, sampling, assessment, and results of the included studies
Full size table
Table 4 Synthesis of findings based on an integrative literature review
Full size table

4 Discussion

The general goal of the study was to review the impact of technology on the quality of working life for older workers. Previous systematic reviews and studies regarding the impact of technological tools debate both the negative and positive effects on the quality of working life for older workers (Dantas et al. 2019; Lavoie 2009; Stara et al. 2020; White and Smeaton 2016) due to work demands that could conflict with expectations of older workers. Nevertheless, most professionals agree that it is important to address this issue and to argue for increasing technological abilities for older people, especially if they want to be active and promote quality of life (Miller and Jones 2019). One study conducted by Andrews et al. (2019) found that the use of digital technology positively affected the well-being of older workers. The study found that digital technology increased job satisfaction and reduced work-related stress. Additionally, the study found that digital technology was associated with increased social support and reduced social isolation. Another study by Fang et al. (2018) found that using digital technology negatively affected the mental health of older workers. The study found that the use of digital technology was associated with increased levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. Additionally, the study found that using digital technology was associated with increased feelings of social isolation. Our results align with this debate and show that different results depend on the type of outcome, technological tools and context, and age group. Generally, we have identified two thematic categories that are most impacted for older workers: an impact on health and technological stress.

4.1 The impact of technological tools on health

Regarding the impact on health, studies have focussed on various health outcomes like sleeping quality (i.e. Blafoss et al. 2019; Konstantoulas et al. 2020), mental health and workability (i.e. Borle et al. 2021), arthritis as chronic condition (i.e. Koreshi and Alpass 2022), physical and quality of life in older community-dwelling low-income adults (i.e. Yin et al. 2021), diet, physical activity, stress and tobacco use (i.e. Cook et al. 2015), stress, and job quality (Kortmann et al. 2021). Overall, studies indicate that technological tools assessing health outcomes are reliable and can provide insight into trigger mechanisms for behavioural and lifestyle interventions to adopt healthier sleep habits (i.e. Konstantoulas et al. 2020). Borle and colleagues (2021) found mixed effects, ICT use does not negatively impact mental health or workability, but digital work intensification is negatively associated with mental health and workability for older workers. Studies that tested web-based programs for improving health outcomes reported modest but significant improvements for mind and body (i.e. FitxOlder mobile technology-assisted Chinese Qigong mind–body exercise program, Yin et al. 2021) and that they are effective for behavioural change, self-efficacy, planning healthy eating, and mild exercise (i.e. HealthyPast50 web-based health program for older workers (Cook et al. 2015)). Kortmann et al. (2021 generally report positive effects of digitalization but also that more digitalized occupations face elevated stress levels in specific negative environmental factors.

4.2 The impact of technological tools on technostress

Studies regarding technostress that we identified show mixed effects of significant and non-significant effects. The results generally indicate higher levels of technological stress in some important aspects specific to working life. For example, le Roux and Botha (2021) found that older workers experience higher levels of techno-complexity, techno-invasion, and techno-uncertainty but not for techno-overload, techno-insecurity or the overall score for technostress when compared with younger groups. Nimrod (2018) also found that technostress is significant for older workers over 60, and all its components are significant aspects for them and with possible negative impacts on their well-being. Gonzales and Morer (2016) identified in their studies that lack of consistency in tool adjustments affects the ergonomics of a workstation for older workers and in general. Finally, Andersen and Sundstrup (2019) anticipate both the negative and positive effects of technology and propose to assess both aspects for their long-term project (i.e. the Senior Working Life project). Although the other studies were focussed on health outcomes, researchers have often also assessed the technological impact and satisfaction that the use of technological tools has for older workers. For example, Borle et al. (2021) reported that 92% of participants reported ICT use at work. Almost 20% reported high levels of digital work intensification, while a similar proportion did not experience digital work intensification.

Similarly, Yin and colleagues report the impact of technological tools, with participants reporting that they are familiar with a technological tool (i.e. a tablet) and that although the protocol of the intervention was disrupted, the recruitment, retention, and fidelity of participants was high. Finally, three studies lack the involvement of technological tools (i.e. Bláfoss et al. 2019; Koreshi and Alpass 2022; Prazeres and Passos 2021). Although they lack to test the impact of technological tools, they bring important insight into the quality of the working life of older adults, especially for health outcomes and age discrimination patterns.

5 Limits of the studies

Research on the general topic is diverse, but efforts so far are consistent. Nevertheless, we also identified some limits of studies that raise several questions about the real impact of technological tools on the quality of the working life of older workers. First, we limited the literature review to the results in English, which we assess as a limitation of the research. Despite English being the dominant language in research, it is also important to look for relevant articles in other languages, as relying solely on English can result in biased information, especially because research is so limited in this area. Most of the studies report a small number of older workers included in their groups, or they are mixed with non-working older participants or younger groups (i.e. Cook et al. 2015; Konstantoulas et al. 2020; le Roux and Botha 2021; Yin et al. 2021).

Most importantly, most research design report age groups differently and does not use a specific age cut-off (i.e. 55) since there are few older workers and categorize them depending on available data. Other research indicates their results without reporting all the details of their methods, like, for example, all the instruments used a specific number of participants (i.e. Gonzales and Mores). Furthermore, some of the studies give limited insight into the impact of technology on at-risk groups (i.e. chronic health conditions such as arthritis, Koreshi and Alpass 2022) or facing daily problems (i.e. sleep problems, Blafoss et al. 2019). Finally, one study limited their research on expected results and methods for long-term projects (i.e. Andersen and Sundstrup 2019).

6 Conclusion

The integrative literature research on the impact of technology on the quality of working life for older workers has provided valuable insight and contributes to the ongoing debate regarding the positive and negative effects of the technological tools involved in work for older workers. As results indicate, studies present both positive and negative effects of technological tools on older workers’ working life quality (i.e. the Senior Working Life project). Furthermore, we believe that this integrated synthesis had unfolded the main themes regarding quality of working life of older workers that is related to technological tools: health outcomes and technostress. This synthesis has brought highlight on the new emergent topic involving older workers and the quality of their working life. So far, the impact of technological tools for older people has been synthesized (Damant et al. 2017), but not specifically for older workers. Our synthesis brought two main domains and critically describe their relevance for this process.

For example, results shed light on various health outcomes relevant to older workers, including sleeping quality, mental health, workability, arthritis as a chronic condition, physical health, and quality of life. Studies exploring these health aspects have employed technological tools to assess and address these concerns, revealing promising results. For instance, studies demonstrated that technological tools can be reliable in assessing health outcomes, offering valuable insight into trigger behavioural and lifestyle interventions to improve sleep habits and overall well-being. Additionally, web-based programs have shown effectiveness in improving mind and body conditions, planning healthy eating, and facilitating mild exercise. However, it is essential to note that there were mixed effects observed in some cases, where digital work intensification was found to negatively impact mental health and workability for older workers. Another good example is related to how ergonomics could enhance the overall work environment for older workers. Therefore, the research indicates that technological interventions have the potential to positively influence health outcomes for older workers, but careful consideration should be given to specific contexts and intervention types.

The study has also addressed the concept of technostress, which refers to the stress experienced by individuals due to the use or presence of technology in their work environment. The research highlighted mixed effects of technostress in older workers, with some aspects showing significant stress levels specific to their working life. Older workers were found to experience higher levels of techno-complexity, techno-invasion, and techno-uncertainty compared to younger groups, while other aspects like techno-overload and techno-insecurity did not exhibit significant differences. This finding suggests that technostress is a relevant issue for older workers, particularly in certain dimensions, which may have potential negative impacts on their well-being.

In conclusion, digital technologies can potentially improve the quality of working life among older workers but are currently under-researched. Interventions, such as wearable devices, web-based health promotion programs, ergonomic design, and continuous sleep quality monitoring, can positively impact physical and mental health, work ability, productivity, and overall well-being. However, the complex and multidimensional nature of quality of working life should be considered when assessing the impact of technology on older workers. Further research is needed to develop effective interventions and evaluate their impact on the quality of working life for older workers.