%0 Journal Article %J JAMA Intern Med %D 2020 %T Comparison of Health Outcomes Among High- and Low-Income Adults Aged 55 to 64 Years in the US vs England %A Choi, Hwajung %A Andrew Steptoe %A Michele M Heisler %A Philippa J Clarke %A Robert F. Schoeni %A Jivraj, Stephen %A Cho, Tsai-Chin %A Kenneth M. Langa %K Demographics %K ELSA %K Income %K socioeconomic status %X Socioeconomic differences in life expectancy, health, and disability have been found in European countries as well as in the US. Identifying the extent and pattern of health disparities, both within and across the US and England, may be important for informing public health and public policy aimed at reducing these disparities.To compare the health of US adults aged 55 to 64 years with the health of their peers in England across the high and low ranges of income in each country.Using data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) and the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) for 2008-2016, a pooled cross-sectional analysis of comparably measured health outcomes, with adjustment for demographic characteristics and socioeconomic status, was conducted. The analysis sample included community-dwelling adults aged 55 to 64 years from the HRS and ELSA, resulting in 46 887 person-years of observations. Data analysis was conducted from September 17, 2019, to May 12, 2020.Residence in the US or England and yearly income.Sixteen health outcomes were compared, including 5 self-assessed outcomes, 3 directly measured outcomes, and 8 self-reported physician-diagnosed health conditions.This cross-sectional study included 12 879 individuals and 31 928 person-years from HRS (mean [SD] age, 59.2 [2.8] years; 51.9% women) and 5693 individuals and 14 959 person-years from ELSA (mean [SD] age, 59.3 [2.9] years; 51.0% women). After adjusting for individual-level demographic characteristics and socioeconomic status, a substantial health gap between lower-income and higher-income adults was found in both countries, but the health gap between the bottom 20% and the top 20% of the income distribution was significantly greater in the US than England on 13 of 16 measures. The adjusted US-England difference in the prevalence gap between the bottom 20% and the top 20% ranged from 3.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.0-5.2 percentage points) in stroke to 9.7 percentage points (95% CI, 5.4-13.9 percentage points) for functional limitation. Among individuals in the lowest income group in each country, those in the US group vs the England group had significantly worse outcomes on many health measures (10 of 16 outcomes in the bottom income decile); the significant differences in adjusted prevalence of health problems in the US vs England for the bottom income decile ranged from 7.6% (95% CI, 6.0%-9.3%) vs 3.8% (95% CI, 2.6%-4.9%) for stroke to 75.7% (95% CI, 72.7%-78.8%) vs 59.5% (95% CI, 56.3%-62.7%) for functional limitation. Among individuals in the highest income group, those in the US group vs England group had worse outcomes on fewer health measures (4 of 16 outcomes in the top income decile); the significant differences in adjusted prevalence of health problems in the US vs England for the top income decile ranged from 36.9% (95% CI, 33.4%-40.4%) vs 30.0% (95% CI, 27.2%-32.7%) for hypertension to 35.4% (95% CI, 32.0%-38.7%) vs 22.5% (95% CI, 19.9%-25.1%) for arthritis.For most health outcomes examined in this cross-sectional study, the health gap between adults with low vs high income appeared to be larger in the US than in England, and the health disadvantages in the US compared with England are apparently more pronounced among individuals with low income. Public policy and public health interventions aimed at improving the health of adults with lower income should be a priority in the US. %B JAMA Intern Med %8 2020 %@ 2168-6106 %G eng %R 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2802 %0 Journal Article %J JAMA Intern Med %D 2017 %T A Comparison of the Prevalence of Dementia in the United States in 2000 and 2012. %A Kenneth M. Langa %A Eric B Larson %A Eileen M. Crimmins %A Jessica Faul %A Deborah A Levine %A Mohammed U Kabeto %A David R Weir %K Aged %K Dementia %K Female %K Humans %K Male %K Prevalence %K Risk Factors %K United States %X

Importance: The aging of the US population is expected to lead to a large increase in the number of adults with dementia, but some recent studies in the United States and other high-income countries suggest that the age-specific risk of dementia may have declined over the past 25 years. Clarifying current and future population trends in dementia prevalence and risk has important implications for patients, families, and government programs.

Objective: To compare the prevalence of dementia in the United States in 2000 and 2012.

Design, Setting, and Participants: We used data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative, population-based longitudinal survey of individuals in the United States 65 years or older from the 2000 (n = 10 546) and 2012 (n = 10 511) waves of the HRS.

Main Outcomes and Measures: Dementia was identified in each year using HRS cognitive measures and validated methods for classifying self-respondents, as well as those represented by a proxy. Logistic regression was used to identify socioeconomic and health variables associated with change in dementia prevalence between 2000 and 2012.

Results: The study cohorts had an average age of 75.0 years (95% CI, 74.8-75.2 years) in 2000 and 74.8 years (95% CI, 74.5-75.1 years) in 2012 (P = .24); 58.4% (95% CI, 57.3%-59.4%) of the 2000 cohort was female compared with 56.3% (95% CI, 55.5%-57.0%) of the 2012 cohort (P < .001). Dementia prevalence among those 65 years or older decreased from 11.6% (95% CI, 10.7%-12.7%) in 2000 to 8.8% (95% CI, 8.2%-9.4%) (8.6% with age- and sex-standardization) in 2012 (P < .001). More years of education was associated with a lower risk for dementia, and average years of education increased significantly (from 11.8 years [95% CI, 11.6-11.9 years] to 12.7 years [95% CI, 12.6-12.9 years]; P < .001) between 2000 and 2012. The decline in dementia prevalence occurred even though there was a significant age- and sex-adjusted increase between years in the cardiovascular risk profile (eg, prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity) among older US adults.

Conclusions and Relevance: The prevalence of dementia in the United States declined significantly between 2000 and 2012. An increase in educational attainment was associated with some of the decline in dementia prevalence, but the full set of social, behavioral, and medical factors contributing to the decline is still uncertain. Continued monitoring of trends in dementia incidence and prevalence will be important for better gauging the full future societal impact of dementia as the number of older adults increases in the decades ahead.

%B JAMA Intern Med %V 177 %P 51-58 %8 2017 01 01 %G eng %U http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?doi=10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6807http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2587084 %N 1 %1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27893041?dopt=Abstract %! JAMA Intern Med %R 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.6807 %0 Journal Article %J Med Care %D 2010 %T Clinical complexity in middle-aged and older adults with diabetes: the Health and Retirement Study. %A Caroline S Blaum %A Christine T Cigolle %A Cynthia Boyd %A Jennifer L. Wolff %A Zhiyi Tian %A Kenneth M. Langa %A David R Weir %K Aged %K Cross-Sectional Studies %K Diabetes Complications %K Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 %K Female %K Glycemic Index %K Health Status %K Health Surveys %K Humans %K Male %K Middle Aged %K Quality of Health Care %K Self Care %K Severity of Illness Index %K Treatment Failure %K United States %X

BACKGROUND: Some patients with diabetes may have health status characteristics that could make diabetes self-management (DSM) difficult and lead to inadequate glycemic control, or limit the benefit of some diabetes management interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how many older and middle-aged adults with diabetes have such health status characteristics.

DESIGN: Secondary data analysis of a nationally representative health interview survey, the Health and Retirement Study, and its diabetes mail-out survey.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Americans aged 51 and older with diabetes (n = 3506 representing 13.6 million people); aged 56 and older in diabetes survey (n = 1132, representing 9.9 million).

MEASUREMENTS: Number of adults with diabetes and (a) relatively good health; (b) health status that could make DSM difficult (eg, comorbidities, impaired instrumental activities of daily living; and (c) characteristics like advanced dementia and activities of daily living dependency that could limit benefit of some diabetes management. Health and Retirement Study measures included demographics. Diabetes Survey included self-measured HbA1c.

RESULTS: Nearly 22% of adults > or =51 with diabetes (about 3 million people) have health characteristics that could make DSM difficult. Another 10% (1.4 million) may receive limited benefit from some diabetes management. Mail-out respondents with health characteristics that could make DSM difficult had significantly higher mean HbA1c compared with people with relatively good health (7.6% vs. 7.3%, P < 0.04.).

CONCLUSIONS: Some middle-aged as well as older adults with diabetes have health status characteristics that might make DSM difficult or of limited benefit. Current diabetes quality measures, including measures of glycemic control, may not reflect what is possible or optimal for all patient groups.

%B Med Care %I 48 %V 48 %P 327-34 %8 2010 Apr %G eng %N 4 %1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20355264?dopt=Abstract %2 PMC3153504 %4 Data analysis/Patients/Diabetes/Glycemic index/Older people/Middle age %$ 22430 %R 10.1097/mlr.0b013e3181ca4035