Richard Franki is the associate editor who writes and creates graphs. He started with the company in 1987, when it was known as the International Medical News Group. In his years as a journalist, Richard has worked for Cap Cities/ABC, Disney, Harcourt, Elsevier, Quadrant, Frontline, and Internet Brands. In the 1990s, he was a contributor to the ill-fated Indications column, predecessor of Livin' on the MDedge.

Hydroxychloroquine use rising in SLE pregnancies

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:19

 

Hydroxychloroquine initiation among pregnant women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) increased from 2001 to 2015, but its use “remains low, and that is concerning for maternal and fetal well-being,” said investigators who analyzed one public and one private database.

The two databases showed increases of somewhat different scale. According to Medicaid data on 3,045 pregnancies among SLE women, initiation of hydroxychloroquine rose from 2.7% in 2001 to 7.5% (P = .0002) in 2010. The analysis of data for 2,255 SLE pregnancies from a large commercial insurance database (Optum Clinformatics) showed an increase from 4.9% in 2003 to 13.6% (P = .0001) in 2015, wrote Bonnie L. Bermas, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and her associates. The report was published in Lupus.

The proportion of women with SLE who were taking hydroxychloroquine before pregnancy and continued it during pregnancy increased in both databases but not significantly: from 67% in 2001 to 72% in 2010 (P = .70) for Medicaid and from 75% in 2004 to 87% in 2015 (P = .07) for Clinformatics. Overall, the proportion of women in both databases who filled hydroxychloroquine prescriptions in pregnancy was 17.2% for the entire study period: The change was 12.4% from 2001 to 37.7% in 2015, the investigators said.

The study was funded by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Dr. Bermas did not report any conflicts. Her associates reported unrelated projects with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Bermas BL et al. Lupus. 2018 Jan 4. doi: 10.1177/0961203317749046.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

Hydroxychloroquine initiation among pregnant women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) increased from 2001 to 2015, but its use “remains low, and that is concerning for maternal and fetal well-being,” said investigators who analyzed one public and one private database.

The two databases showed increases of somewhat different scale. According to Medicaid data on 3,045 pregnancies among SLE women, initiation of hydroxychloroquine rose from 2.7% in 2001 to 7.5% (P = .0002) in 2010. The analysis of data for 2,255 SLE pregnancies from a large commercial insurance database (Optum Clinformatics) showed an increase from 4.9% in 2003 to 13.6% (P = .0001) in 2015, wrote Bonnie L. Bermas, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and her associates. The report was published in Lupus.

The proportion of women with SLE who were taking hydroxychloroquine before pregnancy and continued it during pregnancy increased in both databases but not significantly: from 67% in 2001 to 72% in 2010 (P = .70) for Medicaid and from 75% in 2004 to 87% in 2015 (P = .07) for Clinformatics. Overall, the proportion of women in both databases who filled hydroxychloroquine prescriptions in pregnancy was 17.2% for the entire study period: The change was 12.4% from 2001 to 37.7% in 2015, the investigators said.

The study was funded by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Dr. Bermas did not report any conflicts. Her associates reported unrelated projects with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Bermas BL et al. Lupus. 2018 Jan 4. doi: 10.1177/0961203317749046.

 

Hydroxychloroquine initiation among pregnant women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) increased from 2001 to 2015, but its use “remains low, and that is concerning for maternal and fetal well-being,” said investigators who analyzed one public and one private database.

The two databases showed increases of somewhat different scale. According to Medicaid data on 3,045 pregnancies among SLE women, initiation of hydroxychloroquine rose from 2.7% in 2001 to 7.5% (P = .0002) in 2010. The analysis of data for 2,255 SLE pregnancies from a large commercial insurance database (Optum Clinformatics) showed an increase from 4.9% in 2003 to 13.6% (P = .0001) in 2015, wrote Bonnie L. Bermas, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and her associates. The report was published in Lupus.

The proportion of women with SLE who were taking hydroxychloroquine before pregnancy and continued it during pregnancy increased in both databases but not significantly: from 67% in 2001 to 72% in 2010 (P = .70) for Medicaid and from 75% in 2004 to 87% in 2015 (P = .07) for Clinformatics. Overall, the proportion of women in both databases who filled hydroxychloroquine prescriptions in pregnancy was 17.2% for the entire study period: The change was 12.4% from 2001 to 37.7% in 2015, the investigators said.

The study was funded by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Dr. Bermas did not report any conflicts. Her associates reported unrelated projects with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Bermas BL et al. Lupus. 2018 Jan 4. doi: 10.1177/0961203317749046.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM LUPUS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

More savings available from generic oral contraceptives

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:19

 

Utilization of brand-name oral contraceptives dropped from 27% of all OC prescriptions in 2010 to 17% in 2014, but their share of expenditures remained the same, according to an analysis of almost 20,000 OC-prescribing events.

Brand OCs with available generics represented 44% of expenditures for all OCs in both 2010 and 2014, while generics had 56% and 55% of spending in 2010 and 2014 and brand names without generics took 0% and 1%, respectively, Mark Chee and his associates wrote in a report published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

For the whole 4-year period, brand OCs accounted for 24% of all prescriptions and 42% of all expenditures for the 19,944 OC prescribing events included in the analysis of data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

The average out-of-pocket cost was almost $60 per person per year for generic OCs and just over $117 per person per year for brand-name OCs from 2010 to 2014. “Assuming constant prices, substituting generic [oral contraceptives] for brand when generic options were available would have saved $751 million in out-of-pocket costs during the study years,” the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by a National Institutes of Health grant to Mr. Chee. All of his five associates have received a grant from the Food and Drug Administration to improve prescription of generic drugs.

SOURCE: Chee M. et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7849.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

Utilization of brand-name oral contraceptives dropped from 27% of all OC prescriptions in 2010 to 17% in 2014, but their share of expenditures remained the same, according to an analysis of almost 20,000 OC-prescribing events.

Brand OCs with available generics represented 44% of expenditures for all OCs in both 2010 and 2014, while generics had 56% and 55% of spending in 2010 and 2014 and brand names without generics took 0% and 1%, respectively, Mark Chee and his associates wrote in a report published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

For the whole 4-year period, brand OCs accounted for 24% of all prescriptions and 42% of all expenditures for the 19,944 OC prescribing events included in the analysis of data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

The average out-of-pocket cost was almost $60 per person per year for generic OCs and just over $117 per person per year for brand-name OCs from 2010 to 2014. “Assuming constant prices, substituting generic [oral contraceptives] for brand when generic options were available would have saved $751 million in out-of-pocket costs during the study years,” the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by a National Institutes of Health grant to Mr. Chee. All of his five associates have received a grant from the Food and Drug Administration to improve prescription of generic drugs.

SOURCE: Chee M. et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7849.

 

Utilization of brand-name oral contraceptives dropped from 27% of all OC prescriptions in 2010 to 17% in 2014, but their share of expenditures remained the same, according to an analysis of almost 20,000 OC-prescribing events.

Brand OCs with available generics represented 44% of expenditures for all OCs in both 2010 and 2014, while generics had 56% and 55% of spending in 2010 and 2014 and brand names without generics took 0% and 1%, respectively, Mark Chee and his associates wrote in a report published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

For the whole 4-year period, brand OCs accounted for 24% of all prescriptions and 42% of all expenditures for the 19,944 OC prescribing events included in the analysis of data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

The average out-of-pocket cost was almost $60 per person per year for generic OCs and just over $117 per person per year for brand-name OCs from 2010 to 2014. “Assuming constant prices, substituting generic [oral contraceptives] for brand when generic options were available would have saved $751 million in out-of-pocket costs during the study years,” the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by a National Institutes of Health grant to Mr. Chee. All of his five associates have received a grant from the Food and Drug Administration to improve prescription of generic drugs.

SOURCE: Chee M. et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.7849.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

U.S. influenza activity widespread to start 2018

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:19

 

As far as the influenza virus is concerned, the new year started in the same way as the old one ended: with almost half of the states at the highest level of flu activity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For the week ending Jan. 6, 2018, there were 23 states – including California, Illinois, and Texas – at level 10 on the CDC’s 1-10 scale for influenza-like illness (ILI) activity, which was up from 22 for the last full week of 2017. Joining the 23 states in the “high” range were New Jersey and Ohio at level 9 and Colorado at level 8, the CDC’s influenza division reported Jan. 12.

Nationwide, the proportion of outpatient visits for ILI was 5.8% for the week ending Jan. 6, which is up 166% from just 5 weeks ago, when it was at the national baseline of 2.2% for the week ending Dec. 2, and is higher than at any time during the 2016-2017 flu season, the CDC data show.

Seven flu-related pediatric deaths were reported during the week ending Jan. 6, although one occurred during the week ending Dec. 16 and two were during the week ending Dec. 23. There have been a total of 20 pediatric deaths related to influenza so far for the 2017-2018 season, the CDC said. In 2016-2017, there were 110 pediatric deaths from the flu.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

As far as the influenza virus is concerned, the new year started in the same way as the old one ended: with almost half of the states at the highest level of flu activity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For the week ending Jan. 6, 2018, there were 23 states – including California, Illinois, and Texas – at level 10 on the CDC’s 1-10 scale for influenza-like illness (ILI) activity, which was up from 22 for the last full week of 2017. Joining the 23 states in the “high” range were New Jersey and Ohio at level 9 and Colorado at level 8, the CDC’s influenza division reported Jan. 12.

Nationwide, the proportion of outpatient visits for ILI was 5.8% for the week ending Jan. 6, which is up 166% from just 5 weeks ago, when it was at the national baseline of 2.2% for the week ending Dec. 2, and is higher than at any time during the 2016-2017 flu season, the CDC data show.

Seven flu-related pediatric deaths were reported during the week ending Jan. 6, although one occurred during the week ending Dec. 16 and two were during the week ending Dec. 23. There have been a total of 20 pediatric deaths related to influenza so far for the 2017-2018 season, the CDC said. In 2016-2017, there were 110 pediatric deaths from the flu.
 

 

As far as the influenza virus is concerned, the new year started in the same way as the old one ended: with almost half of the states at the highest level of flu activity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For the week ending Jan. 6, 2018, there were 23 states – including California, Illinois, and Texas – at level 10 on the CDC’s 1-10 scale for influenza-like illness (ILI) activity, which was up from 22 for the last full week of 2017. Joining the 23 states in the “high” range were New Jersey and Ohio at level 9 and Colorado at level 8, the CDC’s influenza division reported Jan. 12.

Nationwide, the proportion of outpatient visits for ILI was 5.8% for the week ending Jan. 6, which is up 166% from just 5 weeks ago, when it was at the national baseline of 2.2% for the week ending Dec. 2, and is higher than at any time during the 2016-2017 flu season, the CDC data show.

Seven flu-related pediatric deaths were reported during the week ending Jan. 6, although one occurred during the week ending Dec. 16 and two were during the week ending Dec. 23. There have been a total of 20 pediatric deaths related to influenza so far for the 2017-2018 season, the CDC said. In 2016-2017, there were 110 pediatric deaths from the flu.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Young e-cigarette users graduating to the real thing

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:19

 

Children who use noncigarette forms of tobacco are significantly more likely to try cigarettes in the future, according to survey data from over 10,000 young people aged 12-17 years.

An initial survey (wave 1) was conducted as part of the nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, with a follow-up (wave 2) administered to participants a year later. The analysis by Shannon L. Watkins, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and her associates was based on data for 10,384 respondents who reported never smoking a cigarette in wave 1 and whose later cigarette use, which occurred in less than 5% overall, was reported in wave 2.

Among those who said that they had ever used an e-cigarette – the most popular of the noncigarette forms in wave 1 – 19.1% reported that they had tried a cigarette in the subsequent 12 months, compared with 3.9% who had never used an e-cigarette in wave 1. The results were similar (see graph) for the other forms of noncigarette tobacco: noncigarette combustibles (bidis, cigarillos, filtered cigars, kreteks, pipes, and traditional cigars), hookah (tobacco waterpipe), and smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, moist snuff, and snus).

Those who used multiple noncigarette products were more likely than users of a single product to initiate cigarette use by wave 2. With never use of any tobacco as the reference, one model used by the investigators put the odds ratios of cigarette ever use at 4.98 for e-cigarettes only, 3.57 for combustibles only, and 8.57 for use of multiple products.

This study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products, National Institute on Drug Abuse, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. No conflicts of interest were reported.
 

SOURCE: Watkins S et al. JAMA Pediatr. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.4173.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Children who use noncigarette forms of tobacco are significantly more likely to try cigarettes in the future, according to survey data from over 10,000 young people aged 12-17 years.

An initial survey (wave 1) was conducted as part of the nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, with a follow-up (wave 2) administered to participants a year later. The analysis by Shannon L. Watkins, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and her associates was based on data for 10,384 respondents who reported never smoking a cigarette in wave 1 and whose later cigarette use, which occurred in less than 5% overall, was reported in wave 2.

Among those who said that they had ever used an e-cigarette – the most popular of the noncigarette forms in wave 1 – 19.1% reported that they had tried a cigarette in the subsequent 12 months, compared with 3.9% who had never used an e-cigarette in wave 1. The results were similar (see graph) for the other forms of noncigarette tobacco: noncigarette combustibles (bidis, cigarillos, filtered cigars, kreteks, pipes, and traditional cigars), hookah (tobacco waterpipe), and smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, moist snuff, and snus).

Those who used multiple noncigarette products were more likely than users of a single product to initiate cigarette use by wave 2. With never use of any tobacco as the reference, one model used by the investigators put the odds ratios of cigarette ever use at 4.98 for e-cigarettes only, 3.57 for combustibles only, and 8.57 for use of multiple products.

This study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products, National Institute on Drug Abuse, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. No conflicts of interest were reported.
 

SOURCE: Watkins S et al. JAMA Pediatr. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.4173.

 

Children who use noncigarette forms of tobacco are significantly more likely to try cigarettes in the future, according to survey data from over 10,000 young people aged 12-17 years.

An initial survey (wave 1) was conducted as part of the nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, with a follow-up (wave 2) administered to participants a year later. The analysis by Shannon L. Watkins, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, and her associates was based on data for 10,384 respondents who reported never smoking a cigarette in wave 1 and whose later cigarette use, which occurred in less than 5% overall, was reported in wave 2.

Among those who said that they had ever used an e-cigarette – the most popular of the noncigarette forms in wave 1 – 19.1% reported that they had tried a cigarette in the subsequent 12 months, compared with 3.9% who had never used an e-cigarette in wave 1. The results were similar (see graph) for the other forms of noncigarette tobacco: noncigarette combustibles (bidis, cigarillos, filtered cigars, kreteks, pipes, and traditional cigars), hookah (tobacco waterpipe), and smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco, dissolvable tobacco, moist snuff, and snus).

Those who used multiple noncigarette products were more likely than users of a single product to initiate cigarette use by wave 2. With never use of any tobacco as the reference, one model used by the investigators put the odds ratios of cigarette ever use at 4.98 for e-cigarettes only, 3.57 for combustibles only, and 8.57 for use of multiple products.

This study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products, National Institute on Drug Abuse, and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. No conflicts of interest were reported.
 

SOURCE: Watkins S et al. JAMA Pediatr. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.4173.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA PEDIATRICS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Office visits have a chronic problem

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:43

 

Chronic problems were the most common reason for office visits to physicians in 2014, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

That year, chronic problems were the major reason for 40% of all office-based physician visits, making them significantly more common than the other four broad categories of visit types: new problem (26%), preventive care (19%), injury (9%), and pre- or postsurgery care (6%), the NCHS said in a recent Data Brief.

Those numbers are almost matched by adults aged 18-64 years, whose visits to office-based physicians were 40% chronic problems, 25% new problems, 18% preventive care, 10% injuries, and 6% pre- or postsurgery care. Adults aged 65 years and older were significantly more likely than were other age groups to see a physician for a chronic problem (51% of visits) and significantly less likely than were younger adults to have an injury (8%), the report’s authors said.

Children were significantly more likely to have a new problem (41% of visits) or get preventive care (32%) than were the other age groups and were significantly less likely to have a chronic problem (18%) or to receive pre- or postsurgery care (2%), according to data from the 2014 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which included 45,710 visit records from 9,989 physicians.

SOURCE: Ashman JJ et al. NCHS Data Brief. 2017;(292):1-8e.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

Chronic problems were the most common reason for office visits to physicians in 2014, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

That year, chronic problems were the major reason for 40% of all office-based physician visits, making them significantly more common than the other four broad categories of visit types: new problem (26%), preventive care (19%), injury (9%), and pre- or postsurgery care (6%), the NCHS said in a recent Data Brief.

Those numbers are almost matched by adults aged 18-64 years, whose visits to office-based physicians were 40% chronic problems, 25% new problems, 18% preventive care, 10% injuries, and 6% pre- or postsurgery care. Adults aged 65 years and older were significantly more likely than were other age groups to see a physician for a chronic problem (51% of visits) and significantly less likely than were younger adults to have an injury (8%), the report’s authors said.

Children were significantly more likely to have a new problem (41% of visits) or get preventive care (32%) than were the other age groups and were significantly less likely to have a chronic problem (18%) or to receive pre- or postsurgery care (2%), according to data from the 2014 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which included 45,710 visit records from 9,989 physicians.

SOURCE: Ashman JJ et al. NCHS Data Brief. 2017;(292):1-8e.

 

Chronic problems were the most common reason for office visits to physicians in 2014, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.

That year, chronic problems were the major reason for 40% of all office-based physician visits, making them significantly more common than the other four broad categories of visit types: new problem (26%), preventive care (19%), injury (9%), and pre- or postsurgery care (6%), the NCHS said in a recent Data Brief.

Those numbers are almost matched by adults aged 18-64 years, whose visits to office-based physicians were 40% chronic problems, 25% new problems, 18% preventive care, 10% injuries, and 6% pre- or postsurgery care. Adults aged 65 years and older were significantly more likely than were other age groups to see a physician for a chronic problem (51% of visits) and significantly less likely than were younger adults to have an injury (8%), the report’s authors said.

Children were significantly more likely to have a new problem (41% of visits) or get preventive care (32%) than were the other age groups and were significantly less likely to have a chronic problem (18%) or to receive pre- or postsurgery care (2%), according to data from the 2014 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, which included 45,710 visit records from 9,989 physicians.

SOURCE: Ashman JJ et al. NCHS Data Brief. 2017;(292):1-8e.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Normal prepregnancy weight becoming less normal

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:19

 

The prevalence of normal weight in women entering pregnancy dropped between 2011 and 2015 in all 38 jurisdictions with available data, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The overall prevalence of normal prepregnancy weight declined from 47.3% to 45.1% over that period in 36 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City, which reports natality data separately from New York state. The decreases were statistically significant in 26 states and New York City, the CDC investigators reported (MMWR. 2018 Jan 5;66[51-2]:1402-7).

“Corresponding with the decline in prepregnancy normal weight prevalence during 2011-2015, the entire [body mass index] distribution shifted toward a higher BMI,” they wrote. Along with an 8% drop in the prevalence of underweight status before pregnancy, overweight status rose by 2% and obesity status increased by 8%, with class III obesity (BMI 40.0 or greater) prevalence increasing by 14%, compared with 10% for class II obesity (BMI 35.0-39.9) and 6% for class I (BMI 30.0-34.9).

Based on data from 48 states, D.C., and New York City, the distribution of prevalence for the BMI categories in 2015 was 3.6% underweight, 45% normal weight, 25.8% overweight, and 25.6% obese, the investigators said.

The CDC analysis was based on natality data from the National Vital Statistics System. The standard birth certificate was revised in 2003 to include maternal height and prepregnancy weight, but only 38 jurisdictions were using it by 2011. By 2015, all states except Connecticut and New Jersey had adopted its use.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

The prevalence of normal weight in women entering pregnancy dropped between 2011 and 2015 in all 38 jurisdictions with available data, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The overall prevalence of normal prepregnancy weight declined from 47.3% to 45.1% over that period in 36 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City, which reports natality data separately from New York state. The decreases were statistically significant in 26 states and New York City, the CDC investigators reported (MMWR. 2018 Jan 5;66[51-2]:1402-7).

“Corresponding with the decline in prepregnancy normal weight prevalence during 2011-2015, the entire [body mass index] distribution shifted toward a higher BMI,” they wrote. Along with an 8% drop in the prevalence of underweight status before pregnancy, overweight status rose by 2% and obesity status increased by 8%, with class III obesity (BMI 40.0 or greater) prevalence increasing by 14%, compared with 10% for class II obesity (BMI 35.0-39.9) and 6% for class I (BMI 30.0-34.9).

Based on data from 48 states, D.C., and New York City, the distribution of prevalence for the BMI categories in 2015 was 3.6% underweight, 45% normal weight, 25.8% overweight, and 25.6% obese, the investigators said.

The CDC analysis was based on natality data from the National Vital Statistics System. The standard birth certificate was revised in 2003 to include maternal height and prepregnancy weight, but only 38 jurisdictions were using it by 2011. By 2015, all states except Connecticut and New Jersey had adopted its use.
 

 

The prevalence of normal weight in women entering pregnancy dropped between 2011 and 2015 in all 38 jurisdictions with available data, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The overall prevalence of normal prepregnancy weight declined from 47.3% to 45.1% over that period in 36 states, the District of Columbia, and New York City, which reports natality data separately from New York state. The decreases were statistically significant in 26 states and New York City, the CDC investigators reported (MMWR. 2018 Jan 5;66[51-2]:1402-7).

“Corresponding with the decline in prepregnancy normal weight prevalence during 2011-2015, the entire [body mass index] distribution shifted toward a higher BMI,” they wrote. Along with an 8% drop in the prevalence of underweight status before pregnancy, overweight status rose by 2% and obesity status increased by 8%, with class III obesity (BMI 40.0 or greater) prevalence increasing by 14%, compared with 10% for class II obesity (BMI 35.0-39.9) and 6% for class I (BMI 30.0-34.9).

Based on data from 48 states, D.C., and New York City, the distribution of prevalence for the BMI categories in 2015 was 3.6% underweight, 45% normal weight, 25.8% overweight, and 25.6% obese, the investigators said.

The CDC analysis was based on natality data from the National Vital Statistics System. The standard birth certificate was revised in 2003 to include maternal height and prepregnancy weight, but only 38 jurisdictions were using it by 2011. By 2015, all states except Connecticut and New Jersey had adopted its use.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM MMWR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

California tops state tobacco prevention spending

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 03/05/2021 - 15:30

 

California will spend almost as much money on tobacco prevention and smoking cessation as the other states combined in 2018, putting it closest to the spending level recommended for each state by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, according to a report on the effects of the 1998 tobacco settlement.

The Golden State has budgeted almost $328 million for tobacco prevention and cessation this year, which amounts to just over 45% of all states’ total spending of $722 million and 94% of the CDC’s recommendation of $348 million. Alaska is the only state close to that in terms of the CDC-recommended level, reaching 93% of its spending target of $10.2 million. In third place for recommended spending is North Dakota, which has budgeted $5.3 million for 2018, or 54% of its CDC target, the report said.



Broken Promises to Our Children: A State-by-State Look at the 1998 Tobacco Settlement 19 Years Later” was released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, and Truth Initiative.

As for actual spending, Florida is second behind California with almost $69 million – 35% of its CDC-recommended level – budgeted for tobacco prevention and smoking cessation in 2018, and New York is third at just over $39 million, which is 19.4% of the CDC recommendation. Two states – Connecticut and West Virginia – will spend no money on such programs this year, the report noted.

The CDC has said that all states combined should be spending $3.3 billion for the year on prevention and cessation efforts, which is about 4.5 times higher than actual budgeted spending. The report also pointed out that the $722 million the states will spend this year amounts to just 2.6% of the $27.5 billion they will collect from the 1998 tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes. By comparison, the report cited data from the Federal Trade Commission showing that the tobacco companies spent $8.9 billion on marketing in 2015.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

California will spend almost as much money on tobacco prevention and smoking cessation as the other states combined in 2018, putting it closest to the spending level recommended for each state by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, according to a report on the effects of the 1998 tobacco settlement.

The Golden State has budgeted almost $328 million for tobacco prevention and cessation this year, which amounts to just over 45% of all states’ total spending of $722 million and 94% of the CDC’s recommendation of $348 million. Alaska is the only state close to that in terms of the CDC-recommended level, reaching 93% of its spending target of $10.2 million. In third place for recommended spending is North Dakota, which has budgeted $5.3 million for 2018, or 54% of its CDC target, the report said.



Broken Promises to Our Children: A State-by-State Look at the 1998 Tobacco Settlement 19 Years Later” was released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, and Truth Initiative.

As for actual spending, Florida is second behind California with almost $69 million – 35% of its CDC-recommended level – budgeted for tobacco prevention and smoking cessation in 2018, and New York is third at just over $39 million, which is 19.4% of the CDC recommendation. Two states – Connecticut and West Virginia – will spend no money on such programs this year, the report noted.

The CDC has said that all states combined should be spending $3.3 billion for the year on prevention and cessation efforts, which is about 4.5 times higher than actual budgeted spending. The report also pointed out that the $722 million the states will spend this year amounts to just 2.6% of the $27.5 billion they will collect from the 1998 tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes. By comparison, the report cited data from the Federal Trade Commission showing that the tobacco companies spent $8.9 billion on marketing in 2015.

 

California will spend almost as much money on tobacco prevention and smoking cessation as the other states combined in 2018, putting it closest to the spending level recommended for each state by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, according to a report on the effects of the 1998 tobacco settlement.

The Golden State has budgeted almost $328 million for tobacco prevention and cessation this year, which amounts to just over 45% of all states’ total spending of $722 million and 94% of the CDC’s recommendation of $348 million. Alaska is the only state close to that in terms of the CDC-recommended level, reaching 93% of its spending target of $10.2 million. In third place for recommended spending is North Dakota, which has budgeted $5.3 million for 2018, or 54% of its CDC target, the report said.



Broken Promises to Our Children: A State-by-State Look at the 1998 Tobacco Settlement 19 Years Later” was released by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, and Truth Initiative.

As for actual spending, Florida is second behind California with almost $69 million – 35% of its CDC-recommended level – budgeted for tobacco prevention and smoking cessation in 2018, and New York is third at just over $39 million, which is 19.4% of the CDC recommendation. Two states – Connecticut and West Virginia – will spend no money on such programs this year, the report noted.

The CDC has said that all states combined should be spending $3.3 billion for the year on prevention and cessation efforts, which is about 4.5 times higher than actual budgeted spending. The report also pointed out that the $722 million the states will spend this year amounts to just 2.6% of the $27.5 billion they will collect from the 1998 tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes. By comparison, the report cited data from the Federal Trade Commission showing that the tobacco companies spent $8.9 billion on marketing in 2015.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content

Massachusetts named healthiest state for 2017

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:43

 

A year of surprises ended with one more bit of unexpected news: Massachusetts, not Hawaii, is the healthiest state in the country, according to the annual “America’s Heath Rankings” report.

Massachusetts’ win may have knocked Hawaii out of the top spot for the first time since 2011, but the Aloha State was still second out of 50 in 2017. Two other New England states were in the top five: Vermont in third and Connecticut in fifth, with Utah sandwiched between them in fourth, the United Health Foundation said in its latest report.

For 2017, the anti-Massachusetts was Mississippi, which finished 50th for the second consecutive year and has never finished out of the bottom three in the 28 years of the rankings’ existence. The other states with the “most significant areas of opportunity for improvement in health and well-being” were Louisiana (ranked 49th), Arkansas (48th), Alabama (47th), and West Virginia (46th), the report said.

The report ranks states using 35 measures in five broad areas: behaviors, community and environment, policy, clinical care, and outcomes. The measures include drug-related death rate, percentage of children in poverty, public health funding per person, mental health provider rate, and diabetes rate.

“America’s Health Rankings” is funded entirely by the private, not-for-profit United Health Foundation, founded by UnitedHealth Group, which operates UnitedHealthcare.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

A year of surprises ended with one more bit of unexpected news: Massachusetts, not Hawaii, is the healthiest state in the country, according to the annual “America’s Heath Rankings” report.

Massachusetts’ win may have knocked Hawaii out of the top spot for the first time since 2011, but the Aloha State was still second out of 50 in 2017. Two other New England states were in the top five: Vermont in third and Connecticut in fifth, with Utah sandwiched between them in fourth, the United Health Foundation said in its latest report.

For 2017, the anti-Massachusetts was Mississippi, which finished 50th for the second consecutive year and has never finished out of the bottom three in the 28 years of the rankings’ existence. The other states with the “most significant areas of opportunity for improvement in health and well-being” were Louisiana (ranked 49th), Arkansas (48th), Alabama (47th), and West Virginia (46th), the report said.

The report ranks states using 35 measures in five broad areas: behaviors, community and environment, policy, clinical care, and outcomes. The measures include drug-related death rate, percentage of children in poverty, public health funding per person, mental health provider rate, and diabetes rate.

“America’s Health Rankings” is funded entirely by the private, not-for-profit United Health Foundation, founded by UnitedHealth Group, which operates UnitedHealthcare.
 

 

A year of surprises ended with one more bit of unexpected news: Massachusetts, not Hawaii, is the healthiest state in the country, according to the annual “America’s Heath Rankings” report.

Massachusetts’ win may have knocked Hawaii out of the top spot for the first time since 2011, but the Aloha State was still second out of 50 in 2017. Two other New England states were in the top five: Vermont in third and Connecticut in fifth, with Utah sandwiched between them in fourth, the United Health Foundation said in its latest report.

For 2017, the anti-Massachusetts was Mississippi, which finished 50th for the second consecutive year and has never finished out of the bottom three in the 28 years of the rankings’ existence. The other states with the “most significant areas of opportunity for improvement in health and well-being” were Louisiana (ranked 49th), Arkansas (48th), Alabama (47th), and West Virginia (46th), the report said.

The report ranks states using 35 measures in five broad areas: behaviors, community and environment, policy, clinical care, and outcomes. The measures include drug-related death rate, percentage of children in poverty, public health funding per person, mental health provider rate, and diabetes rate.

“America’s Health Rankings” is funded entirely by the private, not-for-profit United Health Foundation, founded by UnitedHealth Group, which operates UnitedHealthcare.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Drug price increases far outpaced inflation in 2015

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:43

 

The retail price for a set of 768 prescription drugs rose by 6.4% in 2015, while the general inflation rate increased by just 0.1%, according to the AARP Public Policy Institute and the PRIME Institute at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.

One year, of course, does not make a trend, but how about 10 years? The average increase in the price of the “market basket” of 768 drugs widely used by older Americans has exceeded the rate of inflation every year since the AARP started tracking costs in 2004. This is “attributable entirely to drug price growth among brand name and specialty drugs, which more than offset often substantial price decreases among generic drugs,” Leigh Purvis of AARP and Stephen Schondelmeyer, PharmD, PhD, of the Prime Institute, said in an Rx Price Watch report.

In 2015, the price changes for the three segments of the market basket worked out like this: The 268 brand-name drugs jumped by 15.5%, the 101 specialty drugs increased by 9.6%, and the 399 generic drugs fell by 19.4%, the investigators reported. The overall increase of 6.4% for the entire basket was the smallest since 2010, but the 0.1% inflation rate was the lowest since it hit –0.3% in recession-era 2009.

In terms of actual cost, however, the specialty drugs were far ahead of the other two segments. The average cost of a year of treatment with a specialty drug was more than $52,000 in 2015, which was nine times higher than the brand-name drugs ($5,800) and 100 times higher than the generics ($523), they said.

The Rx Price Watch reports are based on retail-level prescription prices from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. The general inflation rate is based on the Consumer Price Index–All Urban Consumers for All Items, which is measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The retail price for a set of 768 prescription drugs rose by 6.4% in 2015, while the general inflation rate increased by just 0.1%, according to the AARP Public Policy Institute and the PRIME Institute at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.

One year, of course, does not make a trend, but how about 10 years? The average increase in the price of the “market basket” of 768 drugs widely used by older Americans has exceeded the rate of inflation every year since the AARP started tracking costs in 2004. This is “attributable entirely to drug price growth among brand name and specialty drugs, which more than offset often substantial price decreases among generic drugs,” Leigh Purvis of AARP and Stephen Schondelmeyer, PharmD, PhD, of the Prime Institute, said in an Rx Price Watch report.

In 2015, the price changes for the three segments of the market basket worked out like this: The 268 brand-name drugs jumped by 15.5%, the 101 specialty drugs increased by 9.6%, and the 399 generic drugs fell by 19.4%, the investigators reported. The overall increase of 6.4% for the entire basket was the smallest since 2010, but the 0.1% inflation rate was the lowest since it hit –0.3% in recession-era 2009.

In terms of actual cost, however, the specialty drugs were far ahead of the other two segments. The average cost of a year of treatment with a specialty drug was more than $52,000 in 2015, which was nine times higher than the brand-name drugs ($5,800) and 100 times higher than the generics ($523), they said.

The Rx Price Watch reports are based on retail-level prescription prices from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. The general inflation rate is based on the Consumer Price Index–All Urban Consumers for All Items, which is measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

The retail price for a set of 768 prescription drugs rose by 6.4% in 2015, while the general inflation rate increased by just 0.1%, according to the AARP Public Policy Institute and the PRIME Institute at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.

One year, of course, does not make a trend, but how about 10 years? The average increase in the price of the “market basket” of 768 drugs widely used by older Americans has exceeded the rate of inflation every year since the AARP started tracking costs in 2004. This is “attributable entirely to drug price growth among brand name and specialty drugs, which more than offset often substantial price decreases among generic drugs,” Leigh Purvis of AARP and Stephen Schondelmeyer, PharmD, PhD, of the Prime Institute, said in an Rx Price Watch report.

In 2015, the price changes for the three segments of the market basket worked out like this: The 268 brand-name drugs jumped by 15.5%, the 101 specialty drugs increased by 9.6%, and the 399 generic drugs fell by 19.4%, the investigators reported. The overall increase of 6.4% for the entire basket was the smallest since 2010, but the 0.1% inflation rate was the lowest since it hit –0.3% in recession-era 2009.

In terms of actual cost, however, the specialty drugs were far ahead of the other two segments. The average cost of a year of treatment with a specialty drug was more than $52,000 in 2015, which was nine times higher than the brand-name drugs ($5,800) and 100 times higher than the generics ($523), they said.

The Rx Price Watch reports are based on retail-level prescription prices from the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. The general inflation rate is based on the Consumer Price Index–All Urban Consumers for All Items, which is measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

HealthCare.gov enrollment for 2018 nearly doubled in final week

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:43

 

A busy final week of open enrollment at HealthCare.gov almost doubled the total number of health insurance plans selected and nearly equaled the total for last year’s much longer period, according to data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

After the first 6 weeks of enrollment, the total number of plans selected for 2018 stood at 4.68 million. Just 1 week later, when open enrollment ended on Dec. 15, the total was 8.82 million. That works out to 6.43 million plans selected by consumers who renewed their coverage on 1 of the 39 state exchanges that use the HealthCare.gov platform and 2.39 million plans selected by new consumers (those who did not have coverage in 2017), the CMS reported.

The 8.82 million plans selected during the 7 weeks of open enrollment for 2018 coverage was just a bit short of the 9.2 million plans selected for 2017, when the enrollment period was 14 weeks, based on CMS data.

The CMS noted that the numbers for 2018 are estimates that represent plans selected and not the number of consumers who have paid premiums to effectuate their enrollment.
 

SOURCE: CMS.gov Fact Sheet

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

A busy final week of open enrollment at HealthCare.gov almost doubled the total number of health insurance plans selected and nearly equaled the total for last year’s much longer period, according to data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

After the first 6 weeks of enrollment, the total number of plans selected for 2018 stood at 4.68 million. Just 1 week later, when open enrollment ended on Dec. 15, the total was 8.82 million. That works out to 6.43 million plans selected by consumers who renewed their coverage on 1 of the 39 state exchanges that use the HealthCare.gov platform and 2.39 million plans selected by new consumers (those who did not have coverage in 2017), the CMS reported.

The 8.82 million plans selected during the 7 weeks of open enrollment for 2018 coverage was just a bit short of the 9.2 million plans selected for 2017, when the enrollment period was 14 weeks, based on CMS data.

The CMS noted that the numbers for 2018 are estimates that represent plans selected and not the number of consumers who have paid premiums to effectuate their enrollment.
 

SOURCE: CMS.gov Fact Sheet

 

A busy final week of open enrollment at HealthCare.gov almost doubled the total number of health insurance plans selected and nearly equaled the total for last year’s much longer period, according to data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

After the first 6 weeks of enrollment, the total number of plans selected for 2018 stood at 4.68 million. Just 1 week later, when open enrollment ended on Dec. 15, the total was 8.82 million. That works out to 6.43 million plans selected by consumers who renewed their coverage on 1 of the 39 state exchanges that use the HealthCare.gov platform and 2.39 million plans selected by new consumers (those who did not have coverage in 2017), the CMS reported.

The 8.82 million plans selected during the 7 weeks of open enrollment for 2018 coverage was just a bit short of the 9.2 million plans selected for 2017, when the enrollment period was 14 weeks, based on CMS data.

The CMS noted that the numbers for 2018 are estimates that represent plans selected and not the number of consumers who have paid premiums to effectuate their enrollment.
 

SOURCE: CMS.gov Fact Sheet

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default