The Evolution of Excess Deaths in the United States During the First Two Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Understanding consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic requires information on the excess mortality resulting from it. Multiple studies have examined excess deaths during the pandemic's initial stages, but how these have changed over time is unclear. This study used national and state-level death counts and population data from 2009-2022 to evaluate excess fatalities from 3/20-2/21 and 3/21-2/22, with deaths from earlier years used to project baseline counts. The outcomes were total, group-specific, cause-specific, and age-by-cause excess fatalities, and numbers and percentages directly involving COVID-19. Excess deaths declined from 655,735 (95% confidence interval: 619,028-691,980) during the first pandemic year to 586,505 (95% CI: 532,823-639,205) in the second. The reductions were particularly large for Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, seniors, and residents of states with high vaccination rates. Excess deaths increased from the first to second year for persons <65 and in low vaccination states. Excess mortality from some diseases declined but those from alcohol, drug, vehicle, and homicide causes likely grew between the first and second pandemic year, especially for prime-age and younger individuals. The share of excess fatalities involving COVID-19 decreased modestly over time, with little change in its role as an underlying versus contributing cause of death.

Pandemic And Recession Effects On Mortality In The US During The First Year Of COVID-19.

There were almost 700,000 excess deaths in the US from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021, resulting from two often counterbalancing mechanisms: those predicted by changes in unemployment rates occurring during this period, referred to here as the "recession effect," and those predicted by the "pandemic effect," which reflects direct consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infections and COVID-19, accompanying impacts on health and medical care, and other changes in mortality not caused by greater joblessness. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, this study decomposed total mortality in this period into pandemic and recession effects, with additional estimates by sex, race and ethnicity, age, and fourteen causes. Although the pandemic effect increased many types of mortality, the recession effect reduced most types of mortality. Without the recession effect, there would have been nearly 40,000 more deaths than actually occurred. However, there were disparate impacts, particularly for external causes. Vehicular and alcohol-related fatalities and homicides rose because of strong pandemic effects. In contrast, the recession effect accounted for a greater share of the rise in drug mortality. Offsetting pandemic and recession effects resulted in a decrease in the number of suicides. Understanding these diverse impacts provides useful lessons for policy efforts to mitigate the current and future health pandemics.

Excess deaths in the United States during the first year of COVID-19.

Accurately determining the number of excess deaths caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is hard. The most important challenge is determining the counterfactual count of baseline deaths that would have occurred in its absence. Flexible estimation methods were used here to provide this baseline number and plausibility of the resulting estimates was evaluated by examining how changes between baseline and actual prior year deaths compared to historical year-over-year changes during the previous decade. Similar comparisons were used to examine the reasonableness of excess death estimates obtained in prior research. Total, group-specific and cause-specific excess deaths in the U.S. from March 2020 through February 2021 were calculated using publicly available data covering all deaths from March 2009 through December 2020 and provisional data for January 2021 and February 2021. The estimates indicate that there were 649,411 (95% CI: 600,133 to 698,689) excess deaths in the U.S. from 3/20-2/21, a 23% (95% CI: 21%-25%) increase over baseline, with 82.9% (95% CI: 77.0% - 89.7%) of these attributed directly to COVID-19. There were substantial differences across population groups and causes in the ratio of actual-to-baseline deaths, and in the contribution of COVID-19 to excess mortality. Prior research has probably often underestimated baseline mortality and so overstated both excess deaths and the percentage of them attributed to non-COVID-19 causes.

Estimated Prevalence of and Factors Associated With Clinically Significant Anxiety and Depression Among US Adults During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: Claims of dramatic increases in clinically significant anxiety and depression early in the COVID-19 pandemic came from online surveys with extremely low or unreported response rates. Objective: To examine trend data in a calibrated screening for clinically significant anxiety and depression among adults in the only US government benchmark probability trend survey not disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a monthly state-based trend survey conducted over the telephone. Participants were adult respondents in the 50 US states and District of Columbia who were surveyed March to December 2020 compared with the same months in 2017 to 2019. Exposures: Monthly state COVID-19 death rates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression based on responses to a single BRFSS item calibrated to a score of 6 or greater on the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84). All percentages are weighted based on BRFSS calibration weights. Results: Overall, there were 1 429 354 respondents, with 1 093 663 in 2017 to 2019 (600 416 [51.1%] women; 87 153 [11.8%] non-Hispanic Black; 826 334 [61.5%] non-Hispanic White; 411 254 [27.8%] with college education; and 543 619 [56.8] employed) and 335 691 in 2020 (182 351 [51.3%] women; 25 517 [11.7%] non-Hispanic Black; 250 333 [60.5%] non-Hispanic White; 130 642 [29.3%] with college education; and 168 921 [54.9%] employed). Median within-state response rates were 45.9% to 49.4% in 2017 to 2019 and 47.9% in 2020. Estimated 30-day prevalence of clinically significant anxiety and depression was 0.4 (95% CI, 0.0 to 0.7) percentage points higher in March to December 2020 (12.4%) than March to December 2017 to 2019 (12.1%). This estimated increase was limited, however, to students (2.4 [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.9] percentage points) and the employed (0.9 [95% CI, 0.5 to 1.4] percentage points). Estimated prevalence decreased among the short-term unemployed (-1.8 [95% CI, -3.1 to -0.5] percentage points) and those unable to work (-4.2 [95% CI, -5.3 to -3.2] percentage points), but did not change significantly among the long-term unemployed (-2.1 [95% CI, -4.5 to 0.5] percentage points), homemakers (0.8 [95% CI, -0.3 to 1.9] percentage points), or the retired (0.1 [95% CI, -0.6 to 0.8] percentage points). The increase in anxiety and depression prevalence among employed people was positively associated with the state-month COVID-19 death rate (1.8 [95% CI, 1.2 to 2.5] percentage points when high and 0.0 [95% CI, -0.7 to 0.6] percentage points when low) and was elevated among women compared with men (2.0 [95% CI, 1.4 to 2.5] percentage points vs 0.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.6] percentage points), Non-Hispanic White individuals compared with Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black individuals (1.3 [95% CI, 0.6 to 1.9] percentage points vs 1.1 [95% CI, -0.2 to 2.5] percentage points and 0.7 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.5] percentage points), and those with college educations compared with less than high school educations (2.5 [95% CI, 1.9 to 3.1] percentage points vs -0.6 [95% CI, -2.7 to 1.4] percentage points). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, clinically significant US adult anxiety and depression increased less during 2020 than suggested by online surveys. However, this modest aggregate increase could mask more substantial increases in key population segments (eg, first responders) and might have become larger in 2021 and 2022.

Economic Studies on the Opioid Crisis: A Review

The United States has experienced an unprecedented crisis related to the misuse of and addiction to opioids. As of 2018, 128 Americans die each day of an opioid overdose, and total economic costs associated with opioid misuse are estimated to be more than $500 billion annually. The crisis has evolved in three phases, starting in the 1990s and continuing through 2010 with a massive increase in use of prescribed opioids associated with lax prescribing regulations and aggressive marketing efforts by the pharmaceutical industry. A second phase included tightening restrictions on prescribed opioids, reformulation of some commonly misused prescription medications, and a shift to heroin consumption over the period 2010 to 2013. Since 2013, the third phase of the crisis has included a movement towards synthetic opioids, especially fentanyl, and a continued tightening of opioid prescribing regulations, along with the growth of both harm reduction and addiction treatment access policies. Economic research, using innovative frameworks, causal methods, and rich data, has added to our understanding of the causes and consequences of the crisis. This body of research also identifies intended and unintended impacts of policies designed to address the crisis. Although there is general agreement that the causes of the crisis include a combination of supply- and demand-side factors, and interactions between them, there is less consensus regarding the relative importance of each. Studies show that regulations can reduce opioid prescribing but may have less impact on root causes of the crisis and, in some cases, have spillover effects resulting in greater use of more harmful substances obtained in illicit markets, where regulation is less possible. There are effective opioid use disorder treatments available, but access, stigma, and cost hurdles have stifled utilization, resulting in a large degree of under-treatment in the U.S. How challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic may intersect with the opioid crisis is unclear. Emerging areas for future research include understanding how societal and healthcare systems disruptions affect opioid use, as well as which regulations and policies most effectively reduce potentially inappropriate prescription opioid use and illicit opioid sources without unintended negative consequences.