Despite modest gains in lifespan over the past century, the United States still trails many of the world’s countries when it comes to life expectancy, and its poorest citizens live approximately five years less than more affluent persons, according to a new study from Rice University and the University Colorado at Boulder.
The study, “Stagnating Life Expectancies and Future Prospects in an Age of Uncertainty,” used time-series analysis to evaluate historical data on U.S. Mortality from the Human Mortality Database.
The study authors reviewed data from 1930 through 2000 to identify trends in mortality over time and forecast life expectancy to the year 2055.
Their research will be published in an upcoming issue of Social Science Quarterly.
Although the researchers found that the U.S. can expect very moderate gains in coming years (less than an additional three years through 2055), the U.S. still trails its developed counterparts in life expectancy.
For example, the average life expectancy in the U.S. for a person born today is is 78.49, which is significantly lower than people born in Monaco, Macau and Japan, which have the three highest life expectancies (89.68, 84.43 and 83.91 years, respectively).
In addition, the most deprived U.S. citizens tend to live five years less than their more affluent countrymen, according to Justin Denney, Rice assistant professor of sociology, who was principal author for the study.
Denney said that in 1930, average life expectancy in the United States was 59.85. By 2000, it rose to 77.1 years.
“But when broken down, these numbers show that those gains were mostly experienced between 1930 the 1950s and 1960s,” he said. “Since that time, gains in life expectancy have flattened out.
“During periods of expansion in length of life, a similar expansion has occurred between more and less advantaged groups – the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, inequality grows and life expectancy is dramatically impacted,” Denney said. “And despite disproportionate spending on health care, life expectancy in the U.S. Continues to fall down the ladder of international rankings of length of life. It goes to show that prosperity doesn’t necessarily equal long-term health.”
Denney said many of the chronic conditions that have led to smaller gains in life expectancy are more easily treated when people are more financially stable.
He said the study shows “the ugly side of inequality,” and he hopes it will draw attention to the fact that more needs to be done to address stagnating life expectancies in the U.S. And eliminate inequalities in the U.S.
“Even in uncertain times, it is important to look forward in preparing for the needs of future populations,” Denney said. “The results presented here underscore the relevance of policy and health initiatives aimed at improving the nation’s health and reveal important insight into possible limits to mortality improvement over the next five decades.”
A lung screening and surveillance task force, established by the American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) and led by medical professionals from Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), is strongly recommending new guidelines for lung cancer screening.
The guidelines were published last week in the online edition of the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS).
Recent research has shown low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is beneficial in reducing deaths from lung cancer.
The AATS task force recommends an annual lung cancer screening using LDCT for:
David Sugarbaker, MD, the chief of the Division of Thoracic Surgery at BWH and president-elect of the AATS, conceived the idea of creating the guidelines.
“This work will result in a greater chance for patients stricken with early lung cancer to receive curative therapy,” Sugarbaker said.
These guidelines differ from the recommendations of other societies because they recommend screening for patients up to the age of 79. Other societies only recommend screening for patients up to the age of 74.
These guidelines also are unique because they address lung cancer survivors. In total, under the AATS recommendations, 94 million Americans are now eligible for screening.
The AATS task force recommends that screening should not be performed for individuals with conditions that would preclude successful treatment for lung cancer.
“Low-dose CT scanning has been proven to save lives,” said Francine Jacobson, MD, MPH, a thoracic radiologist at BWH and a co-chair of the task force. “I hope this recommendation will encourage physicians to use low-dose CT scanning for a broader range of patients.”
Michael Jaklitsch, MD, a thoracic surgeon at BWH and a co-chair of the task force said, “Lung cancer is an epidemic with over a quarter of a million new cases each year. Now, for the first time in history, there is a clear screening tool that identifies early stages of lung cancer, when treatment is most successful. Our analysis shows this tool of low-dose CT scans to be safe and very cost efficient. Lung cancer screening will save lives, save lungs and inspire many Americans to quit smoking.”
The 14 member task force is made up of thoracic surgeons, thoracic radiologists, medical oncologists, a pulmonologist, a pathologist and an epidemiologist.
They based their conclusion on a review of screening trials in the United States and Europe, an examination of current literature and discussions of clinical practices.
The work of the task force was funded by the AATS.
Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced today that 1.9 million California residents will benefit from $73.9 million in rebates from insurance companies this summer, because of the Affordable Care Act’s 80/20 rule.
These rebates will average $65 for the 1.1 million California families covered by a policy.
The health care law generally requires insurance companies to spend at least 80 percent of consumers’ premium dollars on medical care and quality improvement. Insurers can spend the remaining 20 percent on administrative costs, such as salaries, sales and advertising.
Beginning this year, insurers must notify customers how much of their premiums have been spent on medical care and quality improvement.
Insurance companies that do not meet the 80/20 standard are required to provide their customers a rebate for the difference no later than August 1, 2012.
The 80/20 rule is also known as the Medical Loss Ratio (MLR) standard.
"The 80/20 rule helps ensure consumers get fair value for their health care dollar," Secretary Sebelius said.
Californians owed a rebate will see their value reflected in one of the following ways:
Insurance companies that do not meet the 80/20 standard will send their policyholders a rebate for the difference no later than August 1, 2012.
Consumers will also receive a notice from their insurance company informing them of the 80/20 rule, whether their company met the standard, and, if not, how much of a difference between what the insurer did or did not spend on medical care and quality improvement will be returned to them.
For the first time, all of this information will be publicly posted on HealthCare.gov this summer, allowing consumers to learn what value they’re getting for their premium dollars in their health plan.
For many consumers, the 80/20 rule motivated their plans to lower prices or improve their coverage to meet the standard.
This is one of the ways the 80/20 rule is bringing value to consumers for their health care dollars.
For a detailed breakdown of these rebates by State and by market, please visit http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/reports/mlr-rebates06212012a.html .
For the text of these proposed notifications, please visit http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/other/index.html#mlr .
For more information on the MLR provision in the Affordable Care Act: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2010/11/medical-loss-ratio.html .
For more information on how the Affordable Care Act is creating a transparent market for health insurance, visit: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2010/12/increasing-transparency.html .
A new report released Tuesday by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) shows that 3.1 million young adults have gained health insurance because of the health care law.
Without the health care law – the Affordable Care Act – these 3.1 million young adults would not have health insurance.
As a result of the law, the proportion of insured adults ages 19 through 25 has increased to nearly 75 percent.
The Affordable Care Act requires insurers to allow young adults to remain on their parents’ family plans until their 26th birthday, even if they move away from home or graduate from school. This policy took effect on Sept. 23, 2010.
“Today, because of the health care law, more than 3 million more young adults have health insurance,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “This policy doesn’t just give young adults and their families peace of mind, it also gives them freedom. It means that as they begin their careers, they will be free to make choices based on what they want to do, not on where they can get health insurance.”
Before the Affordable Care Act, young adults were the age group least likely to have health insurance. Not only were young adults more likely to be uninsured, they were also more than twice as likely as older adults to lose private insurance coverage once they had it.
Some young adults lost coverage when they became too old to qualify as a dependent on their parents’ plans, and others lost coverage as they graduated from school or changed jobs.
A similar report released in December 2011 showed that 2.5 million young adults who would otherwise have been uninsured had gained coverage through June 2011.
Using the most recent information on insurance coverage from the National Health Interview Survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, the Tuesday report finds that from September 2010 to December 2011 the percentage of adults ages 19 through 25 with insurance coverage increased from 64.4 percent to 74.8 percent. That translates to 3.1 million young adults with coverage.
This increase continues the steady upward trend in insurance coverage among young adults since the Affordable Care Act went into effect.
Starting in 2014, there will be even more health coverage options available to young adults when Affordable Insurance Exchanges, premium tax credits, and the Medicaid expansion go into effect.
To see the new HHS report, visit http://aspe.hhs.gov/aspe/gaininginsurance/rb.shtml .
To see the National Center for Health Statistics Report, visit http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/ .
To learn more about young adults, like Abby Schanfield, who are helped by the under 26 provision, visit http://www.healthcare.gov/blog/2012/04/mycare_abby.html .
To see a fact sheet about insurance increases for young adults in your state, visit http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2012/06/young-adults06192012a.html .