QuickStats: Percentage of Adults Aged 18 Years or Older with Arthritis, by Sex and Age Group — National Health Interview Survey, United States, 2019

April 30, 2021

mm7017a7-F

In 2019, among adults aged 18 years or older, prevalence of arthritis (including rheumatoid arthritis, gout, lupus, and fibromyalgia) increased with age among both men and women.

For men, prevalence increased from 5.8% among those aged 18–44 years to 22.3% among those aged 45–64 years, 40.1% among those aged 65–74 years, and 44.7% among those aged 75 years or older.

For women, prevalence increased from 6.6% among those aged 18–44 years to 29.3% among those aged 45–64 years, 48.6% among those aged 65–74 years, and 57.8% among those aged 75 years or older.

Women were more likely to have arthritis than were men overall (24.3% versus 18.3%) and in all age groups except 18–44 years, where the difference did not reach statistical significance.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7017a7.htm


PODCAST: Healthy People Initiative, Part Four

April 30, 2021

STATCAST, APRIL 2021: DISCUSSION WITH DAVID HUANG, CHIEF, STATISTICIAN, ABOUT HEALTHY PEOPLE INITIATIVE.

podcast-iconHOST:  David Huang is the chief of the health promotion statistics branch at NCHS, and serves as the center’s primary statistical advisor on the Healthy People initiative. Healthy People for decades now has been identifying science-based objectives with targets to monitor progress and motivate and focus action aimed at improving the health of the nation.  David joined us to discuss the history of the program, what is going on presently, and what the future directions are.

HOST:  So we can expect more products coming in the future – in the days, weeks, months ahead – from “Healthy People 2020.”  What about any differences between “Healthy People 2030” and “2020” – what are some of the more distinctive differences?

DAVID HUANG:  I think the main difference is that there was really a concerted effort by the Department and its stakeholders to reduce the size of “Healthy People.” “2020” was becoming very large and in some ways unwieldy, and it was felt that the initiative had grown too large to be really useful for its stakeholders.  So as part of these efforts, we went through a process over the past several years where we reduced the size of the initiative itself.  We went from about 1100 objectives with data in “2020” to 355 for “2030.”  In addition to that, there was also an effort to maintain a better balance and structure across the initiative.  So during the development of “2030,” after all of the objectives went through the approval process with the interagency steering committee – the federal interagency work group -there was actually another group that reviewed the objectives, the slate of objectives as a whole, and looked for balance.  And there were actually some objectives that were removed, I think one or two that were added, and that was something that was not part of the “2020” process in terms of looking at the balance of objectives as a whole.  As I mentioned earlier, we made sure that the objectives themselves were aligned with the latest science and that included aligning with the latest recommendations, the latest evidence, and also the latest issues that are important in the field of public health, specifically disease prevention and health promotion.

HOST:  Any other future directions that you like to talk about as far as the Healthy People program?

DAVID HUANG: Well of course we’re wrapping up “Healthy People 2020” with the release of a couple of more components that will comprise the rest of the “Healthy People 2020 Final Review.”  As part of that work, we’re also working on a Statistical Note on the elimination of health disparities, specifically among racial and ethnic groups, as well as a more formal archive site for both “Healthy People 2020” and “Data 2020,” which is the Healthy People 2020 database.  Now for “Healthy People 2030,” of course there is a lot to do over the next decade.  And we’re working on a variety of interactive tools, infographics, and products, working with our federal partners including ODPHP.  And this will start with the launch of our database, “Data 2030,” later this year.  Of note also, our webinars that are related to the leading health indicators and overall health and well-being measures.  And finally I’ll note that we are working on a “Healthy People 2030” disparities tool in collaboration with the HHS Office of Minority Health and ODPHP.

HOST:  One question that comes to mind – for “Healthy People 2030” are there any specific objectives dealing with the pandemic?

DAVID HUANG:  So we don’t have anything that is necessarily directly related to COVID, but certainly as many listeners will be aware there are many risk factors and diseases that are tied to COVID-19, and there’s actually a customized list that the Department has created that has all of the “Healthy People 2030” objectives directly related to COVID and this list is actually available to the public from the “Healthy People 2030” website.

HOST:  Anything else at all that we haven’t covered here that you like to mention?

DAVID HUANG:   Sure.  I actually wanted to mention that in terms of the new decade the branch is actually looking forward to expanding outreach and dissemination efforts throughout the decade, and this is actually possible because we do have a more focused and parsimonious set of objectives in Healthy People 2030.

HOST:  Very good – well, thank you David for joining us.

DAVID HUANG:  You’re welcome.

MUSIC BRIDGE:

HOST:  Our thanks to David Huang for joining us on this edition of “Statcast.”

HOST:  This week NCHS released a new report examining the prevalence of underlying chronic conditions among U.S. adults in the years leading into the pandemic. The analysis helps us understand how many people were at high risk for severe COVID-19 illness going into the pandemic.  Seven risk factors were examined: obesity – in particular severe obesity, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD, serious heart conditions including heart failure, coronary artery disease, and cardiomyopathies, chronic kidney disease or CKD, and smoking.  The data come from the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and showed that 3/4 of all adults in the U.S. had at least one of these chronic conditions or risk factors that put them at high risk for severe COVID-19 illness, and over 86% of non-Hispanic black adults had one or more of these conditions.


Race and Hispanic-origin Disparities in Underlying Medical Conditions Associated With Severe COVID-19 Illness: U.S. Adults, 2015–2018

April 28, 2021

Figure_02192021A new NCHS report calculates the prevalence of selected conditions by race and Hispanic origin among U.S. adults (aged 20 and over) during 2015–2018.

Data were used from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Conditions included asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart disease based on self-report; and obesity, severe obesity, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, smoking, and hypertension based on physical measurements

Findings:

  • An estimated 180.3 million (76.2%) U.S. adults had at least one condition during 2015–2018.
  • Approximately 86.4% of non-Hispanic black adults had at least one condition, 58.5% had at least two conditions, and 29% had at least three conditions; these prevalence estimates were significantly higher than among other race and Hispanic-origin groups.
  • Compared with non-Hispanic white adults, Hispanic adults had higher rates of obesity and diabetes.
  • Non-Hispanic Asian adults had lower rates of at least one condition, but higher rates of diabetes compared with non-Hispanic white adults.
  • Non-Hispanic black women were more likely to have multiple conditions, obesity, severe obesity, diabetes, and hypertension compared with non-Hispanic white women.
  • Non-Hispanic black men were more likely to have one or more conditions and hypertension compared with non-Hispanic white men.
  • Hispanic men were more likely to have diabetes compared with non-Hispanic white men.

PODCAST: Healthy People Initiative, Part Three

April 23, 2021

STATCAST, APRIL 2021: DISCUSSION WITH DAVID HUANG, CHIEF, STATISTICIAN, ABOUT HEALTHY PEOPLE INITIATIVE.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210423/20210423.htm

podcast-icon

HOST:  David Huang is the chief of the health promotion statistics branch at NCHS, and serves as the center’s primary statistical advisor on the Healthy People initiative. Healthy People for decades now has been identifying science-based objectives with targets to monitor progress and motivate and focus action aimed at improving the health of the nation.  David joined us to discuss the history of the program, what is going on presently, and what the future directions are.

HOST:  Why don’t we turn to the new tables that you’ve released.  Can you tell us a little bit about what’s going on, what’s new with Healthy People?

DAVID HUANG:  Sure.  So although we’ve launched Healthy People 2030 – and it’s been about a year now – we aren’t done with Healthy People 2020 yet.  “Healthy People 2020 Final Review” is a quantitative assessment of the progress  made towards the 2020 goals and objectives by the end of the decade.  Unlike previous Healthy People data publications like the “Healthy People 2020 Midcourse review” that were released as complete publications, the “Healthy People 2020 Final Review” actually consists of a suite of products that will be released by NCHS on a rolling basis over the course of the next year.  Many of these final review components will be released in a web-based format.  The first release in this suite of products is the web-based “Healthy People 2020 Progress Table” which was released on March 31st.  This table provides the final progress status for 1100 measurable objectives, which are those with at least baseline data. And note that this set of 1100 is actually broader than the 985 trackable objectives mentioned earlier, and those are objectives with the baseline and at least one followed data point.  Final progress was generally measured using the latest available data as of January 2020.  The web format will allow users to dynamically filter the table by any of the following categories in any combination: Healthy People 2020 topic area, key term, and final progress status.  This format will also allow users to download customized tables for future use.  We’re really hopeful that this new format is beneficial for users.  One notable feature about these new tables is the ability to look at objectives by topics and themes – also referred to as ‘key terms’ – that cut across Healthy People 2020 topic areas.  And this is actually a feature that also exists on the Healthy People 2030 website.  This ability to look at objectives not just by topic area but also across these broad topics and themes.

HOST:  Earlier you said that about a third of the 2020 objectives have been met or exceeded, I guess.  Could you give us some highlights from the tables that have been released?

DAVID HUANG:  Sure.  Certainly there are a lot of objectives.  For example, in chronic diseases like cancer, the overall cancer death rate, as well as many of the individual cancer death rate targets have been met.  There are also objectives across other topic areas not related to chronic disease that have been met. For example, persons who are unable to obtain or delay needing medical care is another example in the access to health services topic area.  But all in all, a third of objective targets have been met, and these objectives do stand many of the topic areas across Healthy People 2020.

HOST:  I was just scrolling down some of these and there’s some measures dealing with school and education.  It kind of looks like kids are doing better in school – was that sort of what the data show?

DAVID HUANG:  I think it definitely depends on the objective, but yes there is a very large topic area in “Healthy People 2020” on education and community-based programs.  And there are many objectives in that topic area that have met their targets.  Not all of them are necessarily related to how kids are doing in school.  For example, there’s an objective on the nurse to student ratio.  That’s an example of an objective in that topic area that’s been met.

HOST:  It was interesting because there was one measure that showed that kids were doing better than they were at the baseline, but at the same time fewer thought that school was meaningful or important. I thought that was kind of interesting, almost a contradiction if you will.

DAVID HUANG:  Right and you know there’s also consideration that should be given to the data source. I think there there’s obviously a broad range of not just topics but data sources in “Healthy People.” I think that the progress tables do provide a nice, high-level summary of how we’re doing on broad health indicators and hopefully will be useful for stakeholders.

HOST:  It looks like there’s progress made in some of the health care measures –  more people with medical and dental insurance, more with the source of ongoing care, ER wait times above normal were down – most of that looked pretty positive I guess.  But there were some measures that looked like they weren’t necessarily going in the right direction, such as people unable to get prescription medication when they needed.  It looked like that was lower, is that correct?

DAVID HUANG:  Yes that’s correct and that particular objective is actually part of a series of objectives that look at persons unable to obtain or delaying receipt of medical care, dental care, and then prescription medications as you mentioned is the one that is moving in the wrong direction.

HOST:  And just for people who don’t have the level of statistical sophistication, how the tables are laid out is you have a baseline percentage that you started with, and then at the cut point you have what the percentage did – if it changed either up or down – but then also you have another column that determines whether any change was statistically significant, is that correct?

DAVID HUANG:  Yeah and it is actually a little bit more nuanced than that.  The way that we measure movement when objectives are moving towards their targets is really the percentage of the targeted change that’s achieved.  That number will be equal to 100% if an objective exactly meets its target.  And it’s basically a sliding scale for other objectives that are moving in the right direction.  On the other hand, for objectives that are not moving in the right direction, you simply use the magnitude of the percent change from the baseline to assess movement away.  And then there is that column that you mentioned which does let the user know whether this movement – whether it’s in a positive or negative direction relative to the target is statistically significant or not.

HOST:  Anything else you’d like to talk about with regard to the new tables that have been posted?

DAVID HUANG:  Well, as I mentioned this is part of a larger set of components – the full ”Healthy People 2020 Final Review” will be released in components over the next several months.  So we are definitely looking forward to other components being released.  We will actually be working next on a series of pie charts that will actually use the information in this table and summarize it in pie charts so that users can see at a glance, for example, for their set of objectives that they filter down to, what proportion have met, or exceeded, improved, or got worse, for example.

HOST: Our thanks to David Huang for joining us on this edition of “Statcast.”

 


QuickStats: Age-Adjusted Death Rates for Alzheimer Disease Among Adults Aged ≥65 Years, by Sex — National Vital Statistics System, United States, 1999–2019

April 23, 2021

mm7016a5-f

The age-adjusted death rate for Alzheimer disease increased from 128.8 per 100,000 in 1999 to 233.8 in 2019.

The trend for the total population and for men and women alternated between periods of general increase and periods of stability. Rates were stable from 2016 to 2019, and in 2019 were 263.0 for women and 186.3 for men.

Throughout the 1999–2019 period, the rate was higher for women than for men.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System, Mortality Data, 1999–2019. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/deaths.htm


New COVID-19 Hospital Data

April 21, 2021

21-322915-COVID-DHCS-social-media3-hospital-mortality

NCHS has released new National Hospital Care Survey (NHCS) data from 50 hospitals submitting inpatient and 47 hospitals submitting ED Uniform Bill (UB)-04 administrative claims from March 18, 2020–December 29, 2020.  Even though the data are not nationally representative, they can provide insight on the impact of COVID-19 on various types of hospitals throughout the country. This information is not available in other hospital reporting systems.

The NHCS data from these hospitals can show results by a combination of indicators related to COVID-19, such as length of inpatient stay, in-hospital mortality, comorbidities, and intubation or ventilator use. NHCS data allow for reporting on patient conditions and treatments within the hospital over time.

 


QuickStats: Age-Adjusted Percentage of Adults Aged 25–64 Years Who Are Very Worried About Their Ability to Pay Medical Bills if They Get Sick or Have an Accident, by Sex and Veteran Status

April 16, 2021

mm7015a8-f-medium

In 2019, among adults aged 25–64 years, veterans (11.5%) were less likely than nonveterans (20.1%) to be very worried about their ability to pay their medical bills if they get sick or have an accident.

This pattern was found for both men and women, with veterans less likely than nonveterans to be very worried about medical bills: 11.4% versus 17.5% for men and 12.5% versus 22.4% for women, respectively.

Source: National Center for Health Statistics, National Health Interview Survey, 2019 data. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis.htm

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7015a8.htm


PODCAST: Healthy People Initiative, Part Two

April 16, 2021

STATCAST, APRIL 2021: DISCUSSION WITH DAVID HUANG, CHIEF, STATISTICIAN, ABOUT HEALTHY PEOPLE INITIATIVE.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210416/20210416.htm

podcast-iconHOST:  David Huang is the chief of the health promotion statistics branch at NCHS, and serves as the center’s primary statistical advisor on the Healthy People initiative. Healthy People for decades now has been identifying science-based objectives with targets to monitor progress and motivate and focus action aimed at improving the health of the nation.

HOST:  So there are obviously – since the beginning of the program – there’ve been hundreds and hundreds of objectives set.  Do you have any sort of gauge of how many objectives or what percent of the objectives of we’ve met over the years or exceeded?

DAVID HUANG:  Sure – so we look at these really decade by decade.  And for Healthy People 2020, which we’re closing out now, there were 985 trackable objectives, which were those with at least a baseline and one or more follow up data points.  And of these 985, 334 of these – which is about a third – had met or exceeded their targets at the end of the decade.  This compares with Healthy People 2010, where 172 of 733 – or about 1/4 of trackable objectives – met or exceeded their targets.  Note that over the decades, the balance and composition of objectives as well as target setting methods themselves do vary, so any of these sorts of comparisons across decades should be taken with a grain of salt.

HOST:  Right, so it’s not a direct apples to apples comparison but your goal is always to increase the proportion that are met?

DAVID HUANG:  Yes and no.  I mean I think certainly we do want to say that we’ve met more and more of our targets, but on the flip side you know some of that is directly related to how the targets are set as well as I mentioned kind of the balance and composition of the objectives themselves, so again not an apples to apples comparison.  It’s certainly something that the Department and Healthy People stakeholders are paying attention to.

HOST:  Now you alluded to COVID-19 – what happens when new health challenges appear on the scene, such as COVID-19?

DAVID HUANG:  One of the hallmarks of the Healthy People initiative is its ability to incorporate new science and innovation as well as emerging health priorities.  For example, Healthy People 2030 includes science-based objectives related to opioids and social determinants of health, which are top priorities for HHS and for the nation.  The initiative itself does allow the flexibility for new objectives to be added or even dropped as the decade progresses.  The new Healthy People 2030 website actually features a resource for building customizable lists of objectives that can be used to curate objectives that are relevant to specific goals.  So even though there isn’t anything necessarily specific on COVID-19 in Healthy People 2030, HHS has used this tool to develop a custom list of 2030 objectives that are directly related to COVID-19 and that list is actually available to the public on the Healthy People website.

HOST:  Before we get into some specifics as far as progress made in these objectives, in looking at the new tables I noticed that in some cases there’s more recent data then what you’re referring to as far as the end point. I’ll use some of the cancer death measures – I think 2017 was used and even though there was great progress made on that there’s obviously more recent data than 2017.  So we’re just curious why you don’t use the latest year of data?

DAVID HUANG:  So what you’re referring to is the set of progress tables that we developed for the Healthy People 2020 final review, which is our end of decade assessment of progress.  And because we were dealing with so many objectives and data sources we had to choose a data cutoff and for the Healthy People 2020 final review, that cutoff was January of 2020.  So yes, we certainly acknowledge we don’t necessarily have the latest available data for this report, but the intention is really to be looking across all objectives which is a broad range of objectives.  And certainly we would encourage folks to look to other sources, such as Healthy People 2030 as well as other indicator projects and programs to find the actual latest available data for each individual indicator.

HOST: Our thanks to David Huang for joining us on this edition of “Statcast.”

MUSIC BRIDGE:

HOST:  This week the country reached a grim milestone in the fight against drug abuse. NCHS released the latest monthly provisional numbers showing more than 90,000 Americans lost their lives due to drug overdoses in the one-year period ending in September 2020.  This figure was nearly 29% higher than the total observed the year before.  Over 2/3 of those deaths – or nearly 67,000 – involved an opioid of some kind.  As has been the case for the last several years, fentanyl and other synthetic opioids are the drugs driving this increase.  Among the 50 U.S. states and DC, only South Dakota saw a decline in overdose deaths from the previous year.

NCHS also released a new report this week on flu vaccination among U.S. children.  Using data from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey, NCHS determined that just over half of children six months of age up to age 17 received a flu vaccine in the past year, and that older children were less likely to receive a flu vaccine than younger children.


Influenza Vaccination in the Past 12 Months Among Children Aged 6 Months–17 Years: United States, 2019

April 15, 2021

21-323150-visual-abstract-db407-child-flu-vacQuestions for Lindsey Black, Health Statistician and Lead Author of “Influenza Vaccination in the Past 12 Months Among Children Aged 6 Months–17 Years: United States, 2019.”

Q: Is this the most recent data you have on this topic?  If so, when will you release 2020 vaccination data?

LB: Yes, this is the most recent data. 2020 data will be released in the fall of 2021.


Q: Do you have influenza vaccination data for adults?

LB: Yes, some information on adults is available in the interactive summary health statistics for adults, located at : https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/shs.htm


Q: Do you have trend data that goes further back than 2019?

LB: Influenza vaccination has been collected as part of the sample child on NHIS since about 2005. However, in 2019, there were significant changes to the survey and we have not yet evaluated how that may result in a break in the trend, or the appropriateness of assessing trends across survey period (2019 vs earlier than 2019).


Q: Was there a specific finding in the data that surprised you from this report?

LB: I found it surprising that the amount of regional differences observed. It is so interesting that starting at the East South Central states, and moving North, we see a gradual improvement to 65.3% of children lving in New England that had a vaccination.


Q: Where can I get COVID vaccination data?  Will this be included in future NHIS data?

NHIS began collecting that and it will be included in the 2021 data release in the fall of 2022. In the meantime, Covid-19 vaccinations in the United States provided by CDC are located at:  https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations


Provisional Monthly Drug Overdose Deaths from September 2019 to September 2020

April 14, 2021

Provisional_Drugs_Sept2020

Today, NCHS released the next set of monthly provisional drug overdose death counts.

Provisional data show that the reported number of drug overdose deaths occurring in the United States increased by 26.8% from the 12 months ending in September 2019 to the 12 months ending in September 2020, from 68,757 to 87,203.  After adjustments for delayed reporting, the predicted number of drug overdose deaths showed an increase of 28.8% from the 12 months ending in September 2019 to the 12 months ending in September 2020, from 70,036 to 90,237. 

The reported number of opioid-involved drug overdose deaths in the United States for the 12-month period ending in September 2020 (64,472) increased from 48,140 in the previous year. The predicted number of opioid-involved drug overdose deaths in the United States for the 12-month period ending in September 2020 (66,813) increased from 49,125 in the previous year. Recent trends may still be partially due to incomplete data.