QuickStats: Percentage of Residential Care Community Residents with an Advance Directive by Census Division — National Study of Long-Term Care Providers, 2016

July 23, 2018

In 2016, 77.9% of residents in residential care communities had an advance directive documented in their files.

By Census division, the highest percentage (87.8%) of residents who had an advance directive were located in the Mountain division, followed by residents in East North Central (83.7%), New England (80.0%), West North Central (78.9%), Pacific (77.6%), South Atlantic (77.4%), East South Central (76.4%), Middle Atlantic (68.8%), and West South Central (64.9%).

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Study of Long-Term Care Providers, 2016. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsltcp/index.htm.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6728a7.htm

Advertisements

Adoption-related Behaviors Among Women Aged 18–44 in the United States: 2011–2015

July 19, 2018

Questions for Lead Author Chinagozi Ugwu, Statistician and Author of “Adoption-related Behaviors Among Women Aged 18–44 in the United States: 2011–2015

Q: Why did you decide to focus on adoption-related behaviors in the United States?

CU: Adoption is one way people build their families, and this report provides some basic statistics on adoption in the United States. The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) is one of few sources of nationally representative data on adoption and adoption seeking among adult women in the U.S.


Q: How did the findings vary by age groups?

CU: This report documented some differences by age groups in adoption-related behaviors. Women in the oldest age category (35-44 years) were more likely to be seeking to adopt than women of younger ages, and were also more likely to have ever adopted.

Approximately 1.5% of women aged 35-44 in 2011-2015 were currently seeking to adopt, followed by 1.4% of women aged 25-34 and 0.6% of women aged 18-24. The percentage of women who had ever adopted a child increased with increasing age (0.1%, aged 18–24; 0.5%, aged 25–34; 1.3%, aged 35–44).


Q: Were there any major changes in adoption-related behaviors from previous years?

CU: In this report, we did not study trends in these adoption-related behaviors.  We focused more on providing a snapshot of the demographic characteristics of U.S. adult women who had engaged in these three adoption-related behaviors: ever considered adoption, currently seeking to adopt, and ever adopted a child.


Q: Do you have data for adoption-related behavior data on women older than age 44?

CU: The NSFG data used for this report reflect survey years when the age range extended only to age 44.  Beginning in 2015, the NSFG expanded its age range to 15-49, so future analyses can include adults 18-49.  The public use files for 2015-2017, which will reflect the expanded age range of 15-49 are expected to be released later this year.


Q: What is the take home message in this report?

CU: While the percentages of adult women aged 18-44 with adoption-related experience are relatively low, this report documents key variations by demographic characteristics, including age and current fertility problems. More women with fertility problems than those without had ever considered adopting or were currently seeking to adopt a child. Higher percentages of women in the oldest age (35-44 years) category were currently seeking to adopt or had ever adopted, than women in the youngest age (18-24 years) category.


Accidental Drowning Deaths in the U.S., 2010-2016

July 18, 2018

drowning

Source: National Vital Statistics System, CDC WONDER 2010-2016


Trends in Liver Cancer Mortality Among Adults Aged 25 and Over in the United States, 2000-2016

July 17, 2018

Jiaquan Xu, M.D., NCHS Epidemiologist

Questions for Lead Author Jiaquan Xu, M.D., Epidemiologist, and Author of “Trends in Liver Cancer Mortality Among Adults Aged 25 and Over in the United States, 2000-2016

Q: What made you decide to focus on liver cancer deaths for this study?

JX: It was the dramatic rise in the death rate for liver cancer that caused me to want to look more deeply into various aspects of this marked change and produce this new report. I also wanted to offer state-by-state data for liver cancer mortality, so that the U.S. Public Health Community might have information that will help them in their important work throughout America. While we have seen decreases in death rates from many major causes — such as heart disease, cancer (all cancer combined), and stroke recently – liver cancer deaths stand out far away from the decreasing trends of these causes of death. To elaborate, the age-adjusted death rates for all cancer combined, have declined since 1990. Also, for the top six cancer death causes in 2016 (lung cancer, colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, prostate cancer, and liver cancer), the age-adjusted death rates decreased for four of them (lung, colorectal, breast, and prostate) and increased for two (liver cancer and pancreatic cancer) — with the liver cancer death rate increasing much faster than the pancreatic cancer death rate, since 2000.


Q: Was there a finding in your new report that you hadn’t expected and that really surprised you?

JX:  There actually are quite a few interesting results in this new analysis that surprised me. While there are some reports out there that show the increase of liver cancer mortality, we also know that the liver cancer death rate demonstrates a trend of continued rate increase during the period from 2000 through 2016 – which is the time span this report analyzed. The surprise is that the liver cancer death rate for men is between 2 and 2.5 times the rate for women aged 25 and over, during the period of 2000–2016. Within the four race/ethnic groups analyzed, the only decrease trend in liver cancer mortality observed, is for the non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (API) group. The rate increased for non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic persons. Also the liver cancer death rates varied quite a bit by state, which is another surprising finding.


Q: What made you decide to focus on the age group of adults 25 years old and older?

JX: I had a number of reasons to focus on the liver cancer death rate for adults aged 25 and over. More than 99% of all deaths with liver cancer reported on the death certificate are for adults 25 years of age and over. It made sense to focus this analysis on the majority age group that dies from this cancer cause. We also know that age is a leading risk factor for the development of many types of cancer. Aging increases cancer risk. This is exactly what we see here in this new report. And the liver cancer death rate for older age groups is significantly higher than the rate for younger age groups throughout the period examined in this analysis.


Q: What differences or similarities did you see between or among various demographic groups in this analysis?

JX:  The differences among demographic groups is also what I found most surprising in this report. The liver cancer death rate for men aged 25 and over is between 2 and 2.5 times the rate for women. The liver cancer death rate varies by race/ethnic groups. The Non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (API) group have the highest liver cancer death rate among the four race/ethnic groups analyzed during 2000–2014. The rate for Hispanic adults surpassed the rate for non-Hispanic API and became the highest in 2016. The liver cancer death rate for non-Hispanic white adults was the lowest among the race/ethnic groups throughout the period (2000–2016).


Q: Why do you think there is such a vast difference among the states in death rates from liver cancer?

JX: The mortality data we analyzed does not provide any evidence itself to show the reason or reasons that could contribute to the variation of liver cancer death rates by state. In general, the majority of the liver cancer in the United States is often attributed to some potential risk factors such as metabolic disorders (including obesity, diabetes, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease), chronic Hepatitis C (HCV) infection, excessive consumption of alcohol, smoking, and chronic Hepatitis B (HBV) infection. If the number of people affected by those potential risk factors is different from one state to another, the liver cancer incidence rate and death rate would vary.


Q: What do you think is the reason for the growing increase in deaths from liver cancer in the United States?

JX: The mortality data we analyzed does not provide any evidence itself to show the reason or reasons that could contribute to the rising of the liver cancer death rate in this country. Some risk factors might contribute to the increase in liver cancer incidence rate and death rate. For example, some attribute the baby boomer generation’s higher hepatitis C virus infection rate than other adult age groups. Some have identified an increase in the obesity rate as another reason. Unfortunately, we can’t answer this question with our data, though it is an important question.


Q: What would you say is the take-home message of this report?

JX: I think the real take-home message of this Data Brief is what it can offer to the Public Health Community to learn about liver cancer mortality variance among different groups. The report shows that liver cancer mortality varies by sex, age, race/ethnic groups, and by state. Although the overall liver cancer death rate increased from 2000 to 2016, the rate for non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (API) decreased. The rate for adults aged 45–54 has decreased since 2012.


QuickStats: Percentage of Adults Aged 20 Years or Older Told Their Cholesterol Was High Who Were Taking Lipid-Lowering Medications by Sex and Age Group — National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2005–2006 to 2015–2016

July 16, 2018

The percentage of men told by a health professional that their cholesterol was high who were taking lipid-lowering medications increased from 36% in 2005–2006 to 50% in 2015–2016 among those aged 60 years or older but not among those aged 20–39 years (1% to 2%) or 40–59 years (16% to 17%).

The percentage taking lipid-lowering medications also increased (from 33% to 38%) among women aged 60 years or older but not among women aged 20–39 years (1% to 0.7%) or 40–59 years (from 13% to 11%).

For each survey year from 2005–2006 to 2015–2016, the percentage of both men and women with high cholesterol taking lipid-lowering medications was higher among those aged ≥60 years than those in younger age groups.

Source:  Carroll MD, Mussilino ME, Wolz M, Srinivas PR. Trends in apolipoprotein B, non–high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein for adults 60 years and older by use of lipid-lowering medications: United States, 2005–2006 to 2013–2014 [Research Letter]. Circulation 2018;138:208–10. http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/138/2/208

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6727a6.htm?s_cid=mm6727a6_e


Regional Deaths in the U.S. by Floods, Storms or Lightning, 2010-2016

July 13, 2018

Storms-Floods-Lightning (2)Source:  CDC WONDER: wonder.cdc.gov


Fertility of Men and Women Aged 15–44 in the United States: National Survey of Family Growth, 2011–2015

July 11, 2018

Questions for Gladys Martinez, Statistician, and Lead Author of “Fertility of Men and Women Aged 15–44 in the United States: National Survey of Family Growth, 2011–2015

Q: Why did you decide to examine fertility measures in the United States?

GM: This report provides basic information about four fertility measures for the nation using data from the 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth for women and men aged 15-44: percentage of men and women who have ever had a biological child, how many children they have, the timing of first births, and birth spacing. Differences are shown by age, marital or cohabiting status, education, income, and Hispanic origin and race.


Q: How did the rates estimates vary by gender for women and men?

GM: Some comparisons of the fertility estimates in this report are made for women and men, but these differences were not the focus of the report. Some differences for women and men include the percentage who have ever had a child. By age 40-44, 85.0% of women and 80.4% of men have ever had a child. Among women and men who have ever had a child, the average age at first birth was 23.1 for women and 25.5 for men, similar to the estimates from 2006-2010. The average number of births was 1.2 for women and 0.9 for men.


Q: How did the rates estimates vary by Hispanic origin and race?

GM: Some differences by Hispanic origin and race that are shown in the report include that non-Hispanic Asian women had the highest mean age at first birth (26.7) across all groups shown (24.1 for non-Hispanic white women, and 21.5 for Hispanic women and 21.2 for non-Hispanic black women ). The probability of having a first birth before age 20 was highest for Hispanic and non-Hispanic black women (28%) and lowest for non-Hispanic Asian women (4%).


Q: How did the estimates vary by educational level?

GM: Some differences by educational attainment included that women and men with lower levels of education were more like to have had a birth, to have had more children, and have had their first child at a younger age. For example, among women aged 22-44 who have ever had a child, 53.9% of women with less than a high school education had their first birth before age 20. This percentage for women with a Bachelor’s degree or higher was 5.5%. In this report, education was measured at the time of interview, not at the time of the child’s birth. Differences by education are shown for women and men aged 22-44 since many of those ages 15-21 have not completed their education.


Q: Were there any major changes in the fertility estimates from previous years?

GM: In this report some comparisons of the overall estimates for the percentage of men and women who have ever had a biological child, how many children they have, the timing of first births, and birth spacing for 2011-2015 are made with 2006-2010. Most estimates were similar across the two time points. One difference was that the average number of children born to women decreased from 1.3 in 2006-2010 to 1.2 in 2011-2015 .