Ten Americas: a systematic analysis of life expectancy disparities in the USA.

Nearly two decades ago, the Eight Americas study offered a novel lens for examining health inequities in the USA by partitioning the US population into eight groups based on geography, race, urbanicity, income per capita, and homicide rate. That study found gaps of 12·8 years for females and 15·4 years for males in life expectancy in 2001 across these eight groups. In this study, we aimed to update and expand the original Eight Americas study, examining trends in life expectancy from 2000 to 2021 for ten Americas (analogues to the original eight, plus two additional groups comprising the US Latino population), by year, sex, and age group. In this systematic analysis, we defined ten mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive Americas comprising the entire US population, starting with all combinations of county and race and ethnicity, and assigning each to one of the ten Americas based on race and ethnicity and a variable combination of geographical location, metropolitan status, income, and Black-White residential segregation. We adjusted deaths from the National Vital Statistics System to account for misreporting of race and ethnicity on death certificates. We then tabulated deaths from the National Vital Statistics System and population estimates from the US Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics from Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2021, by America, year, sex, and age, and calculated age-specific mortality rates in each of these strata. Finally, we constructed abridged life tables for each America, year, and sex, and extracted life expectancy at birth, partial life expectancy within five age groups (0-4, 5-24, 25-44, 45-64, and 65-84 years), and remaining life expectancy at age 85 years. We defined the ten Americas as: America 1-Asian individuals; America 2-Latino individuals in other counties; America 3-White (majority), Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native (AIAN) individuals in other counties; America 4-White individuals in non-metropolitan and low-income Northlands; America 5-Latino individuals in the Southwest; America 6-Black individuals in other counties; America 7-Black individuals in highly segregated metropolitan areas; America 8-White individuals in low-income Appalachia and Lower Mississippi Valley; America 9-Black individuals in the non-metropolitan and low-income South; and America 10-AIAN individuals in the West. Large disparities in life expectancy between the Americas were apparent throughout the study period but grew more substantial over time, particularly during the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2000, life expectancy ranged 12·6 years (95% uncertainty interval 12·2-13·1), from 70·5 years (70·3-70·7) for America 9 to 83·1 years (82·7-83·5) for America 1. The gap between Americas with the lowest and highest life expectancies increased to 13·9 years (12·6-15·2) in 2010, 15·8 years (14·4-17·1) in 2019, 18·9 years (17·7-20·2) in 2020, and 20·4 years (19·0-21·8) in 2021. The trends over time in life expectancy varied by America, leading to changes in the ordering of the Americas over this time period. America 10 was the only America to experience substantial declines in life expectancy from 2000 to 2019, and experienced the largest declines from 2019 to 2021. The three Black Americas (Americas 6, 7, and 9) all experienced relatively large increases in life expectancy before 2020, and thus all three had higher life expectancy than America 10 by 2006, despite starting at a lower level in 2000. By 2010, the increase in America 6 was sufficient to also overtake America 8, which had a relatively flat trend from 2000 to 2019. America 5 had relatively similar life expectancy to Americas 3 and 4 in 2000, but a faster rate of increase in life expectancy from 2000 to 2019, and thus higher life expectancy in 2019; however, America 5 experienced a much larger decline in 2020, reversing this advantage. In some cases, these trends varied substantially by sex and age group. There were also large differences in income and educational attainment among the ten Americas, but the patterns in these variables differed from each other and from the patterns in life expectancy in some notable ways. For example, America 3 had the highest income in most years, and the highest proportion of high-school graduates in all years, but was ranked fourth or fifth in life expectancy before 2020. Our analysis confirms the continued existence of different Americas within the USA. One's life expectancy varies dramatically depending on where one lives, the economic conditions in that location, and one's racial and ethnic identity. This gulf was large at the beginning of the century, only grew larger over the first two decades, and was dramatically exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. These results underscore the vital need to reduce the massive inequity in longevity in the USA, as well as the benefits of detailed analyses of the interacting drivers of health disparities to fully understand the nature of the problem. Such analyses make targeted action possible-local planning and national prioritisation and resource allocation-to address the root causes of poor health for those most disadvantaged so that all Americans can live long, healthy lives, regardless of where they live and their race, ethnicity, or income. State of Washington, Bloomberg Philanthropies, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Dwyer-Lindgren L ，Baumann MM ，Li Z ，Kelly YO ，Schmidt C ，Searchinger C ，La Motte-Kerr W ，Bollyky TJ ，Mokdad AH ，Murray CJ ... -  《-》

Disparities in wellbeing in the USA by race and ethnicity, age, sex, and location, 2008-21: an analysis using the Human Development Index.

The Human Development Index (HDI)-a composite metric encompassing a population's life expectancy, education, and income-is used widely for assessing and comparing human development and wellbeing at the country level, but does not account for within-country inequality. In this study of the USA, we aimed to adapt the HDI framework to measure the HDI at an individual level to examine disparities in the distribution of wellbeing by race and ethnicity, sex, age, and geographical location. We used individual-level data on adults aged 25 years and older from the 2008-21 American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample. We extracted information on race and ethnicity, age, sex, location (Public Use Microdata Areas), educational attainment, and household income and size. We merged these data with estimated life tables by race and ethnicity, sex, age, location (county), and year, generated using Bayesian small-area estimation models applied to death certificate data from the National Vital Statistics System. For each individual in the ACS, we used these combined data to estimate years of education, household consumption, and expected lifespan; converted each of these three features into an index using a percentile score; and calculated the HDI as the geometric mean of these three indices. Finally, we grouped individuals into yearly HDI deciles. Years of education, household consumption, and expected lifespan-and thus the HDI-varied considerably among adults in the USA during the 2008-21 period. For most race and ethnicity and sex groups, the mean HDI increased gradually from 2008 to 2019, then declined in 2020 due to declines in expected lifespan, although there were systematic differences in the distribution of the HDI by race and ethnicity and sex. In the lowest HDI decile, there was over-representation (ie, >10% of the total population of a given race and ethnicity and sex group) of American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) males (50% [SE 0·2] in decile, mean annual population in decile 0·37 million [SE 0·002]), Black males (40% [<0·1], 4·67 million [0·006]), AIAN females (23% [0·1], 0·19 million [0·001]), Latino males (21% [<0·1], 3·27 million [0·006]), Black females (14% [<0·1], 1·86 million [0·004]), and Latina females (13% [<0·1], 2·07 million [0·006]). Given differences in total population size, however, White males were the largest population group in the lowest decile (27% [<0·1] of the lowest decile, 5·87 million [0·012]), followed by Black males (22% [<0·1]) and Latino males (15% [<0·1]). There were notable differences in these patterns by age group: for example, for the 25-44 years age group, the lowest HDI decile had even greater over-representation of AIAN males (66% [0·2] in decile, 0·22 million [0·001]) and Black males (46% [<0·1], 2·52 million [0·005]) than the 85 years and older age group (22% [1·1], <0·01 million [<0·001]; and 20% [0·3], 0·03 million [<0·001]). By contrast, the lowest decile had an under-representation of Asian females (2% [<0·1], 0·06 million [<0·001]) in the 25-44 years age group, but an over-representation in the 85 years and older age group (25% [0·3], 0·03 million [<0·001]). The lowest HDI decile for the 25-44 years age group was primarily male (76% [<0·1], 6·44 million [0·009]) whereas for age 85 years and older it was predominantly female (71% [0·1], 0·42 million [0·002]). In the highest HDI decile, shifts in the composition of the population by age were particularly large for White males, who made up 5% (0·1; 0·39 million [0·001]) of this decile in the 25-44 years age group, but 49% (0·2; 0·29 million [0·001]) in the 85 years and older age group. From 2012 to 2021, the proportion of the population living in the lowest HDI decile varied substantially by location, and a disproportionately high share of the population living in locations in much of the southern half of the USA, Appalachia, and Rust Belt states were in the lowest HDI decile. Substantial disparities in wellbeing exist within the USA and are heavily influenced by race and ethnicity (due to racism), sex, age, and geographical location. These disparities are not immutable, but improvement is not a given, and gains can be fleeting in the face of a crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustained action to ensure that everyone has meaningful access to a high-quality education, the means to earn a sufficient income, and the opportunity to live a long and healthy life is needed to reduce these disparities and should focus on the populations and locations that are worst off. State of Washington and National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities.

Dwyer-Lindgren L ，Kendrick P ，Baumann MM ，Li Z ，Schmidt C ，Sylte DO ，Daoud F ，La Motte-Kerr W ，Aldridge RW ，Bisignano C ，Hay SI ，Mokdad AH ，Murray CJL ... -  《-》

The burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors by state in the USA, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 provides a comprehensive assessment of health and risk factor trends at global, regional, national, and subnational levels. This study aims to examine the burden of diseases, injuries, and risk factors in the USA and highlight the disparities in health outcomes across different states. GBD 2021 analysed trends in mortality, morbidity, and disability for 371 diseases and injuries and 88 risk factors in the USA between 1990 and 2021. We used several metrics to report sources of health and health loss related to specific diseases, injuries, and risk factors. GBD 2021 methods accounted for differences in data sources and biases. The analysis of levels and trends for causes and risk factors within the same computational framework enabled comparisons across states, years, age groups, and sex. GBD 2021 estimated years lived with disability (YLDs) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; the sum of years of life lost to premature mortality and YLDs) for 371 diseases and injuries, years of life lost (YLLs) and mortality for 288 causes of death, and life expectancy and healthy life expectancy (HALE). We provided estimates for 88 risk factors in relation to 155 health outcomes for 631 risk-outcome pairs and produced risk-specific estimates of summary exposure value, relative health risk, population attributable fraction, and risk-attributable burden measured in DALYs and deaths. Estimates were produced by sex (male and female), age (25 age groups from birth to ≥95 years), and year (annually between 1990 and 2021). 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated for all final estimates as the 2·5th and 97·5th percentiles values of 500 draws (ie, 500 random samples from the estimate's distribution). Uncertainty was propagated at each step of the estimation process. We found disparities in health outcomes and risk factors across US states. Our analysis of GBD 2021 highlighted the relative decline in life expectancy and HALE compared with other countries, as well as the impact of COVID-19 during the first 2 years of the pandemic. We found a decline in the USA's ranking of life expectancy from 1990 to 2021: in 1990, the USA ranked 35th of 204 countries and territories for males and 19th for females, but dropped to 46th for males and 47th for females in 2021. When comparing life expectancy in the best-performing and worst-performing US states against all 203 other countries and territories (excluding the USA as a whole), Hawaii (the best-ranked state in 1990 and 2021) dropped from sixth-highest life expectancy in the world for males and fourth for females in 1990 to 28th for males and 22nd for females in 2021. The worst-ranked state in 2021 ranked 107th for males (Mississippi) and 99th for females (West Virginia). 14 US states lost life expectancy over the study period, with West Virginia experiencing the greatest loss (2·7 years between 1990 and 2021). HALE ranking declines were even greater; in 1990, the USA was ranked 42nd for males and 32nd for females but dropped to 69th for males and 76th for females in 2021. When comparing HALE in the best-performing and worst-performing US states against all 203 other countries and territories, Hawaii ranked 14th highest HALE for males and fifth for females in 1990, dropping to 39th for males and 34th for females in 2021. In 2021, West Virginia-the lowest-ranked state that year-ranked 141st for males and 137th for females. Nationally, age-standardised mortality rates declined between 1990 and 2021 for many leading causes of death, most notably for ischaemic heart disease (56·1% [95% UI 55·1-57·2] decline), lung cancer (41·9% [39·7-44·6]), and breast cancer (40·9% [38·7-43·7]). Over the same period, age-standardised mortality rates increased for other causes, particularly drug use disorders (878·0% [770·1-1015·5]), chronic kidney disease (158·3% [149·6-167·9]), and falls (89·7% [79·8-95·8]). We found substantial variation in mortality rates between states, with Hawaii having the lowest age-standardised mortality rate (433·2 per 100 000 [380·6-493·4]) in 2021 and Mississippi having the highest (867·5 per 100 000 [772·6-975·7]). Hawaii had the lowest age-standardised mortality rates throughout the study period, whereas Washington, DC, experienced the most improvement (a 40·7% decline [33·2-47·3]). Only six countries had age-standardised rates of YLDs higher than the USA in 2021: Afghanistan, Lesotho, Liberia, Mozambique, South Africa, and the Central African Republic, largely because the impact of musculoskeletal disorders, mental disorders, and substance use disorders on age-standardised disability rates in the USA is so large. At the state level, eight US states had higher age-standardised YLD rates than any country in the world: West Virginia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Ohio, Tennessee, and Arizona. Low back pain was the leading cause of YLDs in the USA in 1990 and 2021, although the age-standardised rate declined by 7·9% (1·8-13·0) from 1990. Depressive disorders (56·0% increase [48·2-64·3]) and drug use disorders (287·6% [247·9-329·8]) were the second-leading and third-leading causes of age-standardised YLDs in 2021. For females, mental health disorders had the highest age-standardised YLD rate, with an increase of 59·8% (50·6-68·5) between 1990 and 2021. Hawaii had the lowest age-standardised rates of YLDs for all sexes combined (12 085·3 per 100 000 [9090·8-15 557·1]), whereas West Virginia had the highest (14 832·9 per 100 000 [11 226·9-18 882·5]). At the national level, the leading GBD Level 2 risk factors for death for all sexes combined in 2021 were high systolic blood pressure, high fasting plasma glucose, and tobacco use. From 1990 to 2021, the age-standardised mortality rates attributable to high systolic blood pressure decreased by 47·8% (43·4-52·5) and for tobacco use by 5·1% (48·3%-54·1%), but rates increased for high fasting plasma glucose by 9·3% (0·4-18·7). The burden attributable to risk factors varied by age and sex. For example, for ages 15-49 years, the leading risk factors for death were drug use, high alcohol use, and dietary risks. By comparison, for ages 50-69 years, tobacco was the leading risk factor for death, followed by dietary risks and high BMI. GBD 2021 provides valuable information for policy makers, health-care professionals, and researchers in the USA at the national and state levels to prioritise interventions, allocate resources effectively, and assess the effects of health policies and programmes. By addressing socioeconomic determinants, risk behaviours, environmental influences, and health disparities among minority populations, the USA can work towards improving health outcomes so that people can live longer and healthier lives. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

GBD 2021 US Burden of Disease Collaborators 《-》

Falls prevention interventions for community-dwelling older adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits, harms, and patient values and preferences.

About 20-30% of older adults (≥ 65 years old) experience one or more falls each year, and falls are associated with substantial burden to the health care system, individuals, and families from resulting injuries, fractures, and reduced functioning and quality of life. Many interventions for preventing falls have been studied, and their effectiveness, factors relevant to their implementation, and patient preferences may determine which interventions to use in primary care. The aim of this set of reviews was to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (task force) on fall prevention interventions. We undertook three systematic reviews to address questions about the following: (i) the benefits and harms of interventions, (ii) how patients weigh the potential outcomes (outcome valuation), and (iii) patient preferences for different types of interventions, and their attributes, shown to offer benefit (intervention preferences). We searched four databases for benefits and harms (MEDLINE, Embase, AgeLine, CENTRAL, to August 25, 2023) and three for outcome valuation and intervention preferences (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, to June 9, 2023). For benefits and harms, we relied heavily on a previous review for studies published until 2016. We also searched trial registries, references of included studies, and recent reviews. Two reviewers independently screened studies. The population of interest was community-dwelling adults ≥ 65 years old. We did not limit eligibility by participant fall history. The task force rated several outcomes, decided on their eligibility, and provided input on the effect thresholds to apply for each outcome (fallers, falls, injurious fallers, fractures, hip fractures, functional status, health-related quality of life, long-term care admissions, adverse effects, serious adverse effects). For benefits and harms, we included a broad range of non-pharmacological interventions relevant to primary care. Although usual care was the main comparator of interest, we included studies comparing interventions head-to-head and conducted a network meta-analysis (NMAs) for each outcome, enabling analysis of interventions lacking direct comparisons to usual care. For benefits and harms, we included randomized controlled trials with a minimum 3-month follow-up and reporting on one of our fall outcomes (fallers, falls, injurious fallers); for the other questions, we preferred quantitative data but considered qualitative findings to fill gaps in evidence. No date limits were applied for benefits and harms, whereas for outcome valuation and intervention preferences we included studies published in 2000 or later. All data were extracted by one trained reviewer and verified for accuracy and completeness. For benefits and harms, we relied on the previous review team's risk-of-bias assessments for benefit outcomes, but otherwise, two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias (within and across study). For the other questions, one reviewer verified another's assessments. Consensus was used, with adjudication by a lead author when necessary. A coding framework, modified from the ProFANE taxonomy, classified interventions and their attributes (e.g., supervision, delivery format, duration/intensity). For benefit outcomes, we employed random-effects NMA using a frequentist approach and a consistency model. Transitivity and coherence were assessed using meta-regressions and global and local coherence tests, as well as through graphical display and descriptive data on the composition of the nodes with respect to major pre-planned effect modifiers. We assessed heterogeneity using prediction intervals. For intervention-related adverse effects, we pooled proportions except for vitamin D for which we considered data in the control groups and undertook random-effects pairwise meta-analysis using a relative risk (any adverse effects) or risk difference (serious adverse effects). For outcome valuation, we pooled disutilities (representing the impact of a negative event, e.g. fall, on one's usual quality of life, with 0 = no impact and 1 = death and ~ 0.05 indicating important disutility) from the EQ-5D utility measurement using the inverse variance method and a random-effects model and explored heterogeneity. When studies only reported other data, we compared the findings with our main analysis. For intervention preferences, we used a coding schema identifying whether there were strong, clear, no, or variable preferences within, and then across, studies. We assessed the certainty of evidence for each outcome using CINeMA for benefit outcomes and GRADE for all other outcomes. A total of 290 studies were included across the reviews, with two studies included in multiple questions. For benefits and harms, we included 219 trials reporting on 167,864 participants and created 59 interventions (nodes). Transitivity and coherence were assessed as adequate. Across eight NMAs, the number of contributing trials ranged between 19 and 173, and the number of interventions ranged from 19 to 57. Approximately, half of the interventions in each network had at least low certainty for benefit. The fallers outcome had the highest number of interventions with moderate certainty for benefit (18/57). For the non-fall outcomes (fractures, hip fracture, long-term care [LTC] admission, functional status, health-related quality of life), many interventions had very low certainty evidence, often from lack of data. We prioritized findings from 21 interventions where there was moderate certainty for at least some benefit. Fourteen of these had a focus on exercise, the majority being supervised (for > 2 sessions) and of long duration (> 3 months), and with balance/resistance and group Tai Chi interventions generally having the most outcomes with at least low certainty for benefit. None of the interventions having moderate certainty evidence focused on walking. Whole-body vibration or home-hazard assessment (HHA) plus exercise provided to everyone showed moderate certainty for some benefit. No multifactorial intervention alone showed moderate certainty for any benefit. Six interventions only had very-low certainty evidence for the benefit outcomes. Two interventions had moderate certainty of harmful effects for at least one benefit outcome, though the populations across studies were at high risk for falls. Vitamin D and most single-component exercise interventions are probably associated with minimal adverse effects. Some uncertainty exists about possible adverse effects from other interventions. For outcome valuation, we included 44 studies of which 34 reported EQ-5D disutilities. Admission to long-term care had the highest disutility (1.0), but the evidence was rated as low certainty. Both fall-related hip (moderate certainty) and non-hip (low certainty) fracture may result in substantial disutility (0.53 and 0.57) in the first 3 months after injury. Disutility for both hip and non-hip fractures is probably lower 12 months after injury (0.16 and 0.19, with high and moderate certainty, respectively) compared to within the first 3 months. No study measured the disutility of an injurious fall. Fractures are probably more important than either falls (0.09 over 12 months) or functional status (0.12). Functional status may be somewhat more important than falls. For intervention preferences, 29 studies (9 qualitative) reported on 17 comparisons among single-component interventions showing benefit. Exercise interventions focusing on balance and/or resistance training appear to be clearly preferred over Tai Chi and other forms of exercise (e.g., yoga, aerobic). For exercise programs in general, there is probably variability among people in whether they prefer group or individual delivery, though there was high certainty that individual was preferred over group delivery of balance/resistance programs. Balance/resistance exercise may be preferred over education, though the evidence was low certainty. There was low certainty for a slight preference for education over cognitive-behavioral therapy, and group education may be preferred over individual education. To prevent falls among community-dwelling older adults, evidence is most certain for benefit, at least over 1-2 years, from supervised, long-duration balance/resistance and group Tai Chi interventions, whole-body vibration, high-intensity/dose education or cognitive-behavioral therapy, and interventions of comprehensive multifactorial assessment with targeted treatment plus HHA, HHA plus exercise, or education provided to everyone. Adding other interventions to exercise does not appear to substantially increase benefits. Overall, effects appear most applicable to those with elevated fall risk. Choice among effective interventions that are available may best depend on individual patient preferences, though when implementing new balance/resistance programs delivering individual over group sessions when feasible may be most acceptable. Data on more patient-important outcomes including fall-related fractures and adverse effects would be beneficial, as would studies focusing on equity-deserving populations and on programs delivered virtually. Not registered.

Pillay J ，Gaudet LA ，Saba S ，Vandermeer B ，Ashiq AR ，Wingert A ，Hartling L ... -  《Systematic Reviews》

Burden of disease scenarios by state in the USA, 2022-50: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.

The capacity to anticipate future health issues is important for both policy makers and practitioners in the USA, as such insights can facilitate effective planning, investment, and implementation strategies. Forecasting trends in disease and injury burden is not only crucial for policy makers but also garners substantial interest from the general populace and leads to a better-informed public. Through the integration of new data sources, the refinement of methodologies, and the inclusion of additional causes, we have improved our previous forecasting efforts within the scope of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) to produce forecasts at the state and national levels for the USA under various possible scenarios. We developed a comprehensive framework for forecasting life expectancy, healthy life expectancy (HALE), cause-specific mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to 359 causes of disease and injury burden from 2022 to 2050 for the USA and all 50 states and Washington, DC. Using the GBD 2021 Future Health Scenarios modelling framework, we forecasted drivers of disease, demographic drivers, risk factors, temperature and particulate matter, mortality and years of life lost (YLL), population, and non-fatal burden. In addition to a reference scenario (representing the most probable future trajectory), we explored various future scenarios and their potential impacts over the next several decades on human health. These alternative scenarios comprised four risk elimination scenarios (including safer environment, improved behavioural and metabolic risks, improved childhood nutrition and vaccination, and a combined scenario) and three USA-specific scenarios based on risk exposure or attributable burden in the best-performing US states (improved high adult BMI and high fasting plasma glucose [FPG], improved smoking, and improved drug use [encompassing opioids, cocaine, amphetamine, and others]). Life expectancy in the USA is projected to increase from 78·3 years (95% uncertainty interval 78·1-78·5) in 2022 to 79·9 years (79·5-80·2) in 2035, and to 80·4 years (79·8-81·0) in 2050 for all sexes combined. This increase is forecasted to be modest compared with that in other countries around the world, resulting in the USA declining in global rank over the 2022-50 forecasted period among the 204 countries and territories in GBD, from 49th to 66th. There is projected to be a decline in female life expectancy in West Virginia between 1990 and 2050, and little change in Arkansas and Oklahoma. Additionally, after 2023, we projected almost no change in female life expectancy in many states, notably in Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Iowa, Maine, and Wisconsin. Female HALE is projected to decline between 1990 and 2050 in 20 states and to remain unchanged in three others. Drug use disorders and low back pain are projected to be the leading Level 3 causes of age-standardised DALYs in 2050. The age-standardised DALY rate due to drug use disorders is projected to increase considerably between 2022 and 2050 (19·5% [6·9-34·1]). Our combined risk elimination scenario shows that the USA could gain 3·8 additional years (3·6-4·0) of life expectancy and 4·1 additional years (3·9-4·3) of HALE in 2050 versus the reference scenario. Using our USA-specific scenarios, we forecasted that the USA could gain 0·4 additional years (0·3-0·6) of life expectancy and 0·6 additional years (0·5-0·8) of HALE in 2050 under the improved drug use scenario relative to the reference scenario. Life expectancy and HALE are likewise projected to be 0·4-0·5 years higher in 2050 under the improved adult BMI and FPG and improved smoking scenarios compared with the reference scenario. However, the increases in these scenarios would not substantially improve the USA's global ranking in 2050 (from 66th of 204 in life expectancy in the reference scenario to 63rd-64th in each of the three USA-specific scenarios), indicating that the USA's best-performing states are still lagging behind other countries in their rank throughout the forecasted period. Regardless, an estimated 12·4 million (11·3-13·5) deaths could be averted between 2022 and 2050 if the USA were to follow the combined scenario trajectory rather than the reference scenario. There would also be 1·4 million (0·7-2·2) fewer deaths over the 28-year forecasted period with improved adult BMI and FPG, 2·1 million (1·3-2·9) fewer deaths with improved exposure to smoking, and 1·2 million (0·9-1·5) fewer deaths with lower rates of drug use deaths. Our findings highlight the alarming trajectory of health challenges in the USA, which, if left unaddressed, could lead to a reversal of the health progress made over the past three decades for some US states and a decline in global health standing for all states. The evidence from our alternative scenarios along with other published studies suggests that through collaborative, evidence-based strategies, there are opportunities to change the trajectory of health outcomes in the USA, such as by investing in scientific innovation, health-care access, preventive health care, risk exposure reduction, and education. Our forecasts clearly show that the time to act is now, as the future of the country's health and wellbeing-as well as its prosperity and leadership position in science and innovation-are at stake. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

GBD 2021 US Burden of Disease and Forecasting Collaborators 《-》