Search

Uncontrolled seizures among people with epilepsy increase risk of adverse health and social outcomes including increased risk of death. Previous population-based studies have reported suboptimal seizure control and disparities in seizure control among U.S. adults with active epilepsy (self-reported doctor-diagnosed epilepsy and taking anti-seizure medicine or with ≥ 1 seizures in the past 12 months) by annual family income. This brief is based upon data from the 2021 and 2022 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to provide updated national estimates of the percentages of adults with active epilepsy with and without seizure control (0 seizures in past 12 months) vs. ≥ 1) by anti-seizure medication use and by annual family income. Annual family income was operationalized with NHIS poverty-income ratio (PIR) categories (i.e., total family income divided by the US Census Bureau poverty threshold given the family's size and number of children): PIR < 1.0, 1.0 ≤ PIR < 2.0; PIR ≥ 2.0. Among the 1.1 % of US adults with active epilepsy in 2021/2022 (estimated population about 2.9 million), 49.2 % (∼1.4 million) were taking antiseizure medication and reported no seizures (seizure control), 36.2 % (∼1.1 million) were taking antiseizure medication and reported ≥ 1 seizures (uncontrolled seizures), and 14.7 % (∼400,000) were not taking antiseizure medication and had ≥ 1 seizures (uncontrolled seizures). The prevalence of seizure control among those with active epilepsy varied substantially by annual family income, with a larger percentage of adults with PIR ≥ 2.0 reporting seizure control compared with those with PIR < 1.0. Opportunities for intervention include improving provider awareness of epilepsy treatment guidelines, enhancing access and referral to specialty care, providing epilepsy self-management supports, and addressing unmet social needs of people with epilepsy with uncontrolled seizures, especially those at lowest family income levels., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Growing research has examined the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with epilepsy. There are no published national estimates of COVID-19 vaccination status among U.S. adults with active epilepsy. The purpose of this study is to use 2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data to examine select COVID-19-related outcomes by epilepsy status in a nationally representative sample of US adults. The study sample met the criteria for operationalization of epilepsy status (i.e., active epilepsy vs. no epilepsy history) and select questions related to COVID-19 testing, vaccination, delays in care, or experience with virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic. All analyses accounted for the NHIS complex sample design and response sampling weights. Our study found that in 2021 receipt of one COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults with active epilepsy was generally similar to that among adults without a history of epilepsy. By age, adults aged 18-44 years with active epilepsy (27.0%) were significantly less likely to have reported receiving two COVID-19 vaccinations compared with their peers with no epilepsy history (39.1%). Compared to adults with no epilepsy history, adults with active epilepsy reported similar experiences and outcomes regarding COVID-19 testing and obtaining health care during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study provides baseline estimates of select COVID-19 outcomes among US adults with active epilepsy to guide interventions and additional studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

This study used the most recent national data from the 2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) to provide updated estimates of the prevalence of active epilepsy (self-reported doctor-diagnosed epilepsy, currently under treatment with antiseizure medicines or had at least 1 seizure in the past 12 months, or both) and inactive epilepsy (self-reported doctor-diagnosed history of epilepsy, not under treatment with antiseizure medicines and with no seizures in the past 12 months) overall and by sex, age groups, race/ethnicity, education level, and health insurance status. In 2021, 1.1% of U.S. adults, (approximately 2,865,000 adults) reported active epilepsy; 0.6% (approximately 1,637,000 adults) reported inactive epilepsy. The prevalence of active epilepsy and inactive epilepsy did not differ by age or sex. Active and inactive epilepsy prevalence differed by educational level. Weighted population estimates are reported for each subgroup (e.g., women; non-Hispanic Blacks) for program or policy development. Although active epilepsy prevalence has remained relatively stable over the past decade, this study shows that more than half of U.S. adults with active epilepsy have ≤high school diploma/GED, which can inform the development and implementation of interventions. Additional monitoring is necessary to examine population trends in active prevalence overall and in subgroups., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Obesity increases the risk for metabolic and cardiovascular disease, and this risk occurs at lower body mass index (BMI) thresholds in Asian adults than in White adults. The degree to which obesity prevalence varies across heterogeneous Asian American subgroups is unclear because most obesity estimates combine all Asian Americans into a single group., Objective: To quantify obesity prevalence in Asian American subgroups among U.S. adults using both standard BMI categorizations and categorizations tailored to Asian populations., Design: Cross-sectional., Setting: United States, 2013 to 2020., Participants: The analytic sample included 2 882 158 adults aged 18 years or older in the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys (2013 to 2020). Participants self-identified as non-Hispanic White ([NHW] n = 2 547 965); non-Hispanic Black ([NHB] n = 263 136); or non-Hispanic Asian ([NHA] n = 71 057), comprising Asian Indian ( n = 13 916), Chinese ( n = 11 686), Filipino ( n = 11 815), Japanese ( n = 12 473), Korean ( n = 3634), and Vietnamese ( n = 2618) Americans., Measurements: Obesity prevalence adjusted for age and sex calculated using both standard BMI thresholds (≥30 kg/m 2 ) and BMI thresholds modified for Asian adults (≥27.5 kg/m 2 ), based on self-reported height and weight., Results: Adjusted obesity prevalence (by standard categorization) was 11.7% (95% CI, 11.2% to 12.2%) in NHA, 39.7% (CI, 39.4% to 40.1%) in NHB, and 29.4% (CI, 29.3% to 29.5%) in NHW participants; the prevalence was 16.8% (CI, 15.2% to 18.5%) in Filipino, 15.3% (CI, 13.2% to 17.5%) in Japanese, 11.2% (CI, 10.2% to 12.2%) in Asian Indian, 8.5% (CI, 6.8% to 10.5%) in Korean, 6.5% (CI, 5.5% to 7.5%) in Chinese, and 6.3% (CI, 5.1% to 7.8%) in Vietnamese Americans. The prevalence using modified criteria (BMI ≥27.5 kg/m 2 ) was 22.4% (CI, 21.8% to 23.1%) in NHA participants overall and 28.7% (CI, 26.8% to 30.7%) in Filipino, 26.7% (CI, 24.1% to 29.5%) in Japanese, 22.4% (CI, 21.1% to 23.7%) in Asian Indian, 17.4% (CI, 15.2% to 19.8%) in Korean, 13.6% (CI, 11.7% to 15.9%) in Vietnamese, and 13.2% (CI, 12.0% to 14.5%) in Chinese Americans., Limitation: Body mass index estimates rely on self-reported data., Conclusion: Substantial heterogeneity in obesity prevalence exists among Asian American subgroups in the United States. Future studies and public health efforts should consider this heterogeneity., Primary Funding Source: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a leading contributor to morbidity and mortality in the United States (US). Prior DM prevalence estimates in Asian Americans are predominantly from Asians aggregated into a single group, but the Asian American population is heterogenous., Objective: To evaluate self-reported DM prevalence in disaggregated Asian American subgroups to inform targeted management and prevention., Design: Serial cross-sectional analysis., Participants: Respondents to the US Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys who self-identify as non-Hispanic Asian American (NHA, N=57,001), comprising Asian Indian (N=11,089), Chinese (N=9458), Filipino (N=9339), Japanese (N=10,387), and Korean Americans (N=2843), compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW, N=2,143,729) and non-Hispanic Black (NHB, N=215,957) Americans., Main Measures: Prevalence of self-reported DM. Univariate Satterthwaite-adjusted chi-square tests compared the differences in weighted DM prevalence by sociodemographic and health status., Key Results: Self-reported fully adjusted DM prevalence was 8.7% (95% confidence interval 8.2-9.3) in NHA, compared to 14.3% (14.0-14.6) in NHB and 10.0% (10.0-10.1) in NHW (p<0.01 for difference). In NHA subgroups overall, DM prevalence was 14.4% (12.6-16.3) in Filipino, 13.4% (10.9-16.2) in Japanese, 10.7% (9.6-11.8) in Asian Indian, 5.1% (4.2-6.2) in Chinese, and 4.7% (3.4-6.3) in Korean Americans (p<0.01). Among those aged ≥65 years, DM prevalence was highest in Filipino (35.0% (29.4-41.2)) and Asian Indian (31.5% (25.9-37.8)) Americans. Adjusted for sex, education, and race/ethnicity-specific obesity category, NHA overall had a 21% higher DM prevalence compared to NHW (prevalence ratio 1.21 [1.14-1.27]), while prevalence ratios were 1.42 (1.24-1.63) in Filipinos and 1.29 (1.14-1.46) in Asian Indians., Conclusions: Adjusted self-reported DM prevalence is higher in NHA compared with NHW. Disaggregating NHA reveals heterogeneity in self-reported DM prevalence, highest in Filipino and Asian Indian Americans., (© 2021. Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Introduction: Early recognition of stroke symptoms and recognizing the importance of calling 9-1-1 improves the timeliness of appropriate emergency care, resulting in improved health outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess changes in awareness of stroke symptoms and calling 9-1-1 from 2009 to 2014., Methods: We analyzed data among 27,211 adults from 2009 and 35,862 adults from 2014 using the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The NHIS included 5 questions in both 2009 and 2014 about stroke signs and symptoms and one about the first action to take when someone is having a stroke. We estimated the prevalence of awareness of each symptom, all 5 symptoms, the importance of calling 9-1-1, and knowledge of all 5 symptoms plus the importance of calling 9-1-1 (indicating recommended stroke knowledge). We assessed changes from 2009 to 2014 in the prevalence of awareness. Data analyses were conducted in 2016., Results: In 2014, awareness of stroke symptoms ranged from 76.1% (sudden severe headache) to 93.7% (numbness of face, arm, leg, side); 68.3% of respondents recognized all 5 symptoms, and 66.2% were aware of all recommended stroke knowledge. After adjusting for sex, age, educational attainment, and race/ethnicity, logistic regression results showed a significant absolute increase of 14.7 percentage points in recommended stroke knowledge from 2009 (51.5%) to 2014 (66.2%). Among US adults, recommended stroke knowledge increased from 2009 to 2014., Conclusion: Stroke awareness among US adults has improved but remains suboptimal.

Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the United States (1). Heart attacks (also known as myocardial infarctions) occur when a portion of the heart muscle does not receive adequate blood flow, and they are major contributors to heart disease, with an estimated 750,000 occurring annually (2). Early intervention is critical for preventing mortality in the event of a heart attack (3). Identification of heart attack signs and symptoms by victims or bystanders, and taking immediate action by calling emergency services (9-1-1), are crucial to ensure timely receipt of emergency care and thereby improve the chance for survival (4). A recent report using National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2014 found that 47.2% of U.S. adults could state all five common heart attack symptoms (jaw, neck, or back discomfort; weakness or lightheadedness; chest discomfort; arm or shoulder discomfort; and shortness of breath) and knew to call 9-1-1 if someone had a heart attack (5). To assess changes in awareness and response to an apparent heart attack, CDC analyzed data from NHIS to report awareness of heart attack symptoms and calling 9-1-1 among U.S. adults in 2008, 2014, and 2017. The adjusted percentage of persons who knew all five common heart attack symptoms increased from 39.6% in 2008 to 50.0% in 2014 and to 50.2% in 2017. The adjusted percentage of adults who knew to call 9-1-1 if someone was having a heart attack increased from 91.8% in 2008 to 93.4% in 2014 and to 94.9% in 2017. Persistent disparities in awareness of heart attack symptoms were observed by demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk group. Public health awareness initiatives and systematic integration of appropriate awareness and action in response to a perceived heart attack should be expanded across the health system continuum of care., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

From 95,196 sample adults in the combined 2010, 2013, and 2015 U.S. National Health Interview Survey, we estimated the association between histories of epilepsy and heart disease after accounting for sociodemographic characteristics and behavioral risk factors. Adults 18 years old or older with an epilepsy history reported heart disease (21%) about nine percentage points more often than those without such a history (12%), overall and within levels of characteristics and risk factors. These increases in heart disease history for adults with an epilepsy history compared with adults without such a history were greater in those 45-64 years old or at the lowest family income levels. These increases of heart disease in adults with an epilepsy history highlight two needs-to prevent the occurrence of heart disease and to reduce its consequences. Because comorbidity from heart disease can complicate epilepsy management, physicians caring for those with epilepsy should be aware of these increased risks, identify risk factors for heart disease, and recommend to their patients with epilepsy ways to diminish these risks., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Healthy People 2020 identified health-related quality of life and well-being (WB) as indicators of population health for the next decade. This study examined the measurement properties of the NIH PROMIS(®) Global Health Scale, the CDC Healthy Days items, and associations with the Satisfaction with Life Scale., Methods: A total of 4,184 adults completed the Porter Novelli's HealthStyles mailed survey. Physical and mental health (9 items from PROMIS Global Scale and 3 items from CDC Healthy days measure), and 4 WB factor items were tested for measurement equivalence using multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis., Results: The CDC items accounted for similar variance as the PROMIS items on physical and mental health factors; both factors were moderately correlated with WB. Measurement invariance was supported across gender and age; the magnitude of some factor loadings differed between those with and without a chronic medical condition., Conclusions: The PROMIS, CDC, and WB items all performed well. The PROMIS items captured a broad range of functioning across the entire continuum of physical and mental health, while the CDC items appear appropriate for assessing burden of disease for chronic conditions and are brief and easily interpretable. All three measures under study appear to be appropriate measures for monitoring several aspects of the Healthy People 2020 goals and objectives.

Purpose: To develop and psychometrically evaluate the brief Public Health Surveillance Well-Being Scale (PHS-WB) that captures mental, physical, and social components of well-being., Methods: Using data from 5,399 HealthStyles survey respondents, we conducted bi-factor, item response theory, and differential item functioning analyses to examine the psychometric properties of a pool of 34 well-being items. Based on the statistical results and content considerations, we developed a brief 10-item well-being scale and assessed its construct validity through comparisons of demographic subgroups and correlations with measures of related constructs., Results: Based on the bi-factor analyses, the items grouped into both an overall factor and individual domain-specific factors. The PHS-WB scale demonstrated good internal consistency (alpha = 0.87) and correlated highly with scores for the entire item pool (r = 0.94). The well-being scale scores differed as expected across demographic groups and correlated with global and domain-specific measures of similar constructs, supporting its construct validity., Conclusion: The 10-item PHS-WB scale demonstrates good psychometric properties, and its high correlation with the item pool suggests minimal loss of information with the use of fewer items. The brief PHS-WB allows for well-being assessment on national surveys or in other situations where a longer form may not be feasible.

Introduction: Among veterans, having been selected into the military and having easy access to medical care during and after military service may reduce premature mortality but not morbidity from mental distress and may not improve health-related quality of life. The objective of this study was to determine whether veterans in different racial/ethnic groups differ in their health-related quality of life from each other and from their civilian counterparts., Methods: Among 800,000 respondents to the 2007-2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys, approximately 110,000 identified themselves as veterans and answered questions about their sociodemographic characteristics, self-rated health, and recent health-related quality of life. Nonoverlapping 95% confidence intervals of means distinguished veterans and civilians of different racial/ethnic groups., Results: Veteran and civilian American Indians/Alaska Natives reported more physically unhealthy days, mentally unhealthy days, and recent activity limitation days than their veteran and civilian counterparts in other racial/ethnic groups. Non-Hispanic white veterans and Hispanic veterans reported more physically unhealthy days, mentally unhealthy days, and recent activity limitation days than their civilian counterparts., Conclusion: Unlike findings in other studies, our findings show that veterans' health-related quality of life differs from that of civilians both within the same racial/ethnic group and among different racial/ethnic groups. Because once-healthy soldiers may not be as healthy when they return to civilian life, assessing their health-related quality of life over time may identify those who need help to regain their health.