BACKGROUND: Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at increased risk of HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections and premature mortality due to drug overdose. Medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), such as methadone or buprenorphine, reduces injecting behaviors, HIV and HCV transmission, and mortality from opioid overdose. Using data from National HIV Behavioral Surveillance, we evaluated the unmet need for MOUD among PWID in 23 U.S. cities. METHODS: PWID were recruited by respondent-driven sampling, interviewed, and tested for HIV. This analysis includes PWID who were ≥18 years old and reported injecting drugs and opioid use in the past 12 months. We used Poisson regression to examine factors associated with self-reported unmet need for MOUD and reported adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Of 10,879 PWID reporting using opioids, 68.8% were male, 48.2% were ≥45 years of age, 38.8% were non-Hispanic White, 49.6% experienced homelessness, and 28.0% reported an unmet need for MOUD in the past 12 months. PWID who were more likely to report unmet need for MOUD experienced homelessness (aPR 1.26; 95% CI: 1.19-1.34), were incarcerated in the past 12 months (aPR 1.15; 95% CI: 1.08-1.23), injected ≥once a day (aPR 1.42; 95% CI: 1.31-1.55), reported overdose (aPR 1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.42), and sharing of syringes (aPR 1.14; 95% CI: 1.06-1.23). CONCLUSIONS: The expansion of MOUD provision for PWID is critical. Integrating syringe service programs and MOUD provision and linking PWID who experience overdose, incarceration or homelessness to treatment with MOUD could improve its utilization among PWID.

Transgender women, especially transgender women of color, are disproportionately affected by HIV. However, no surveillance system collects data on HIV risk factors among this population. To address this gap, CDC developed a surveillance system entitled National HIV Behavioral Surveillance Among Transgender Women (NHBS-Trans) to assess behavioral and contextual data through systematic biobehavioral surveillance to monitor behavioral risk factors, prevention usage, and HIV prevalence among transgender women. NHBS-Trans used respondent-driven sampling in seven urban areas in the United States. Trained interviewers used a standardized, anonymous questionnaire to collect information on HIV-related behavioral risk factors, HIV testing, and use of prevention services. Each of the seven participating project areas recruited approximately 200 eligible transgender women and offered anonymous HIV testing. Overall, in the seven project areas, 1,757 participants completed the eligibility screener for NHBS-Trans during 2019-2020; of these, 6.6% were seeds (i.e., a limited number of initial participants who were chosen by referrals from persons and community-based organizations who knew or were part of the local population of transgender women). A total of 1,637 (93.2%) participants were eligible, consented, and completed the interview. Of these, 1,624 (99.2%) agreed to HIV testing. Of the total 1,637 participants, 29 participants did not report identity of woman or transgender woman, resulting in a final sample of 1,608 transgender women. NHBS-Trans project area staff members (n = 14) reported that the survey was timely and addressed a critical need for HIV surveillance in a population that is often overlooked. The MMWR supplement includes this overview report on NHBS-Trans, which describes the methods (history, participant eligibility criteria, questionnaire, data collection, and HIV testing) as well as evaluation of project implementation and the performance of the questionnaire content, specifically the acceptability for transgender women. The other NHBS-Trans reports in the supplement include information on pre-exposure prophylaxis use, psychosocial syndemic conditions and condomless anal intercourse, nonprescription hormone use, homelessness, discrimination and the association between employment discrimination and health care access and use, and social support and the association between certain types of violence and harassment (gender-based verbal and physical abuse or harassment, physical intimate partner abuse or harassment, and sexual violence) and suicidal ideation. NHBS-Trans provides important data related to the goals of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S. initiative. Findings from NHBS-Trans can help guide community leaders, clinicians, and public health officials in improving access to and use of HIV prevention and treatment services by transgender women.

Despite recent declines in numbers of people who inject drugs (PWID) diagnosed with HIV, clusters of HIV among PWID are ongoing, especially among PWID experiencing homelessness. Using data from the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance in 2018, we evaluated the association between homelessness and injection risk and prevention behaviors among HIV-negative PWID who were recruited by respondent-driven sampling in 23 U.S. cities. Interviewers assessed sociodemographic characteristics, history of overdose, and behavioral risk and prevention factors for HIV. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) and 95% CI were obtained using Poisson regression models. Of 10,614 HIV-negative PWID participants, 7275 (68.5%) reported experiencing homelessness. Homeless PWID were more likely than those who were not to be younger age, white, unemployed, without health insurance, in poverty, experiencing psychological distress, and incarcerated in the past 12 months. PWID experiencing homelessness were significantly more likely to report injection risk behaviors [share syringes/equipment (aPR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.20-1.33), non-fatal opioid overdose (aPR = 1.64; 95% CI = 1.49-1.79)] and prevention behaviors [testing for HIV in past 12 months (aPR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.12-1.24) and using syringe services programs (aPR = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.03-1.16)] than PWID not experiencing homelessness. Homelessness among PWID is associated with injection risk behaviors and non-fatal overdose.

BACKGROUND: The National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) is a comprehensive system for biobehavioral surveillance conducted since 2003 in 3 populations disproportionately affected by HIV: gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM); people who inject drugs; and heterosexually active persons at increased risk for HIV infection (HET). This ongoing and systematic collection and analysis of data is needed to identify baseline prevalence of behavioral risk factors and prevention service use, as well as to measure progress toward meeting HIV prevention goals among key populations disproportionately affected by HIV. OBJECTIVE: This manuscript provides an overview of NHBS from 2003 to 2019. METHODS: NHBS is conducted in rotating, annual cycles; these 3 annual cycles are considered a round. Venue-based, time-space sampling is used for the MSM population. Respondent-driven sampling is used for people who inject drugs and HET populations. A standardized, anonymous questionnaire collects information on HIV-related behavioral risk factors, HIV testing, and use of prevention services. In each cycle, approximately 500 eligible persons from each participating area are interviewed and offered anonymous HIV testing. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2019, 168,600 persons were interviewed and 143,570 agreed to HIV testing across 17 to 25 cities in the United States. In the fifth round (2017 to 2019), over 10,000 (10,760-12,284) persons were interviewed each of the 3 population cycles in 23 cities. Of those, most (92%-99%) agreed to HIV testing. Several cities also conducted sexually transmitted infection or hepatitis C testing. CONCLUSIONS: NHBS is critical for monitoring the impact of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the United States initiative. Data collected from NHBS are key to describe trends in key populations and tailor new prevention activities to ensure high prevention impact. NHBS data provide valuable information for monitoring and evaluating national HIV prevention goals and guiding national and local HIV prevention efforts. Furthermore, NHBS data can be used by public health officials and researchers to identify HIV prevention needs, allocate prevention resources, and develop and improve prevention programs directed to the populations of interest and their communities.

Transgender women* are disproportionately affected by HIV. Among 1,608 transgender women who participated in CDC's National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) during 2019-2020, 42% received a positive HIV test result (1). This report provides results from seven U.S. urban areas where the 2019-2020 NHBS questionnaire was administered. Thirty-eight percent of participants reported having previously received a positive test result for HIV. Detrimental socioeconomic factors, including low income (44%), homelessness (39%), and severe food insecurity in the past 12 months (40%), were common and associated with lower receipt of HIV prevention and treatment services. Having a usual health care source or a provider with whom the participant was comfortable discussing gender-related health issues was associated with improved HIV prevention and treatment outcomes, including HIV testing, preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use, and viral suppression. These findings illustrate the benefit of gender-affirming approaches used by health care providers (2), and highlight the challenging socioeconomic conditions faced by many transgender women. Ensuring access to gender-affirming health care approaches and addressing the socioeconomic challenges of many transgender women could improve access to and use of HIV prevention and care in this population and will help achieve the goals of the Ending the HIV Epidemic in the United States initiative (3).

In 2019, heterosexual sex accounted for 23% of new HIV diagnoses in the United States and six dependent areas (1). Although preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can safely reduce the risk for HIV infection among heterosexual persons, this group is underrepresented in PrEP research (2). CDC analyzed National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) data to describe PrEP awareness among heterosexually active adults in cities with high HIV prevalence. Overall, although 32.3% of heterosexually active adults who were eligible were aware of PrEP, <1% used PrEP. Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities were identified, with the lowest awareness of PrEP among residents of Puerto Rico (5.8%) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) men (19.5%) and women (17.6%). Previous studies have found that heterosexual adults are interested in taking PrEP when they are aware of it (3); tailoring PrEP messaging, including Spanish-language messaging, to heterosexual adults, might increase PrEP awareness and mitigate disparities in use.

Bacterial meningitis is a major global cause of morbidity and mortality. Rapid identification of the aetiological agent of meningitis is essential for clinical and public health management and disease prevention given the wide range of pathogens that cause the clinical syndrome and the availability of vaccines that protect against some, but not all, of these. Since microbiological culture is complex, slow, and often impacted by prior antimicrobial treatment of the patient, molecular diagnostic assays have been developed for bacterial detection. Distinguishing between meningitis caused by Neisseria meningitidis (meningococcus), Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus), Haemophilus influenzae, and Streptococcus agalactiae and identifying their polysaccharide capsules is especially important. Here, we review methods used in the identification of these bacteria, providing an up-to-date account of available assays, allowing clinicians and diagnostic laboratories to make informed decisions about which assays to use.

Excessive alcohol use is a leading cause of preventable death in the United States (1) and costs associated with it, such as those from losses in workplace productivity, health care expenditures, and criminal justice, were $249 billion in 2010 (2). CDC used the Alcohol-Related Disease Impact (ARDI) application* to estimate national and state average annual alcohol-attributable deaths and years of potential life lost (YPLL) during 2011-2015, including deaths from one's own excessive drinking (e.g., liver disease) and from others' drinking (e.g., passengers killed in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes). This study found an average of 95,158 alcohol-attributable deaths (261 deaths per day) and 2.8 million YPLL (29 years of life lost per death, on average) in the United States each year. Of all alcohol-attributable deaths, 51,078 (53.7%) were caused by chronic conditions, and 52,921 (55.6%) involved adults aged 35-64 years. Age-adjusted alcohol-attributable deaths per 100,000 population ranged from 20.8 in New York to 53.1 in New Mexico. YPLL per 100,000 population ranged from 631.9 in New York to 1,683.5 in New Mexico. Implementation of effective strategies for preventing excessive drinking, including those recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force (e.g., increasing alcohol taxes and regulating the number and concentration of alcohol outlets), could reduce alcohol-attributable deaths and YPLL.(†).

Each year, excessive drinking accounts for one in 10 deaths among U.S. adults aged 20-64 years (1), and approximately 90% of adults who report excessive drinking* binge drink (i.e., consume five or more drinks for men or four or more drinks for women on a single occasion) (2). In 2015, 17.1% of U.S. adults aged >/=18 years reported binge drinking approximately once a week and consumed an average of seven drinks per binge drinking episode, resulting in 17.5 billion total binge drinks, or 467 total binge drinks per adult who reported binge drinking (3). CDC analyzed 2011-2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data to assess trends in total annual binge drinks per adult who reported binge drinking in the United States overall and in the individual states. The age-adjusted(dagger) total annual number of binge drinks per adult who reported binge drinking increased significantly from 472 in 2011 to 529 in 2017. Total annual binge drinks per adult who reported binge drinking also increased significantly from 2011 to 2017 among those aged 35-44 years (26.7%, from 468 to 593) and 45-64 years (23.1%, from 428 to 527). The largest percentage increases in total binge drinks per adult who reported binge drinking during this period were observed among those without a high school diploma (45.8%) and those with household incomes <$25,000 (23.9%). Strategies recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force( section sign) for reducing excessive drinking (e.g., regulating alcohol outlet density) might reduce binge drinking and related health risks.

Correct and consistent condom use and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) are protective against sexual transmission of HIV (1,2). The incidence of HIV infection among Hispanic/Latino men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United States is increasing (3). HIV risk among Hispanic/Latino MSM differs based on their place of birth and years of U.S. residence (4). Data from CDC's National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS)* for 2011-2017 were analyzed to assess changes in sexual risk behaviors among Hispanic/Latino MSM by place of birth and years of U.S. residence. Overall, condomless anal sex during the previous 12 months increased from 63% in 2011 to 74% in 2017, and PrEP use during the previous 12 months increased from 3% in 2014 to 24% in 2017. Regardless of place of birth, nearly 75% of Hispanic/Latino MSM reported condomless anal sex during 2017. However, because of PrEP use, <60% of non-U.S.-born Hispanic/Latino MSM and <50% of U.S.-born Hispanic/Latino MSM reported unprotected anal sex (condomless anal sex and no PrEP use) during 2017. Results indicate that PrEP can be a vital tool for reducing HIV transmission among Hispanic/Latino MSM, especially those who have condomless anal sex. Interventions to prevent HIV acquisition, including increasing PrEP uptake, could address cultural and linguistic needs of Hispanic/Latino MSM, as well as other barriers to prevention of HIV infection typically faced by all MSM.

In 2017, preliminary data show that gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for 67% of new diagnoses of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, that MSM who inject drugs accounted for an additional 3%, and that African American/black (black) and Hispanic/Latino (Hispanic) MSM were disproportionately affected (1). During 2010-2015, racial/ethnic disparities in HIV incidence increased among MSM; in 2015, rates among black and Hispanic MSM were 10.5 and 4.9 times as high, respectively, as the rate among white MSM (compared with 9.2 and 3.8 times as high, respectively, in 2010) (2). Increased use of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which reduces the risk for sexual acquisition of HIV infection by approximately 99% when taken daily as prescribed,* would help to reduce these disparities and support the Ending the HIV Epidemic: A Plan for America initiative(dagger) (3). Although PrEP use has increased among all MSM since 2014 (4), racial/ethnic disparities in PrEP use could increase existing disparities in HIV incidence among MSM (5). To understand racial/ethnic disparities in PrEP awareness, discussion with a health care provider, and use (steps in the HIV PrEP continuum of care) (6), CDC analyzed 2017 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) data. Black and Hispanic MSM were significantly less likely than were white MSM to be aware of PrEP, to have discussed PrEP with a health care provider, or to have used PrEP within the past year. Among those who had discussed PrEP with a health care provider within the past year, 68% of white MSM, 62% of Hispanic MSM, and 55% of black MSM, reported PrEP use. Prevention efforts need to increase PrEP use among all MSM and target eliminating racial/ethnic disparities in PrEP use.( section sign).

BACKGROUND: In the United States, approximately 10% of adults 18-64 years are disabled. However, there is scarce literature on the associations between disability and HIV risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess disability prevalence and its associations to health and HIV risk factors among low socioeconomic status (SES) (</=high school education or</=poverty guidelines) urban adults. METHODS: We assessed disability prevalence from a cross-sectional sample of low SES urban heterosexually active adults at risk for HIV participating in the 2016 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) and calculated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals of disability for health and HIV risk behaviors. RESULTS: In the NHBS sample, 39.6% of participants reported any disability. Disability was associated with health care utilization and risk behaviors, even when adjusting for demographics. Participants with disabilities were more likely to have condomless sex with a casual partner and engage in exchange sex. CONCLUSIONS: Low SES urban heterosexually active adults reported high prevalence of disabilities and differences in health, health care utilization, and risk factors. Disability might contribute to sexual risk behaviors that increase the likelihood of HIV infection. Further investigations into the intersection of disability and HIV risk are needed, especially in poor communities often excluded from national assessments.

In February 2019, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed a strategic initiative to end the human immunodeficiency (HIV) epidemic in the United States by reducing new HIV infections by 90% during 2020-2030* (1). Phase 1 of the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative focuses on Washington, DC; San Juan, Puerto Rico; and 48 counties where the majority of new diagnoses of HIV infection in 2016 and 2017 were concentrated and on seven states with a disproportionate occurrence of HIV in rural areas relative to other states.(dagger) One of the four pillars in the initiative is protecting persons at risk for HIV infection using proven, comprehensive prevention approaches and treatments, such as HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which is the use of antiretroviral medications that have proven effective at preventing infection among persons at risk for acquiring HIV. In 2014, CDC released clinical PrEP guidelines to health care providers (2) and intensified efforts to raise awareness and increase the use of PrEP among persons at risk for infection, including gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM), a group that accounted for an estimated 68% of new HIV infections in 2016 (3). Data from CDC's National HIV Behavioral Surveillance (NHBS) were collected in 20 U.S. urban areas in 2014 and 2017, covering 26 of the geographic areas included in Phase I of the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative, and were compared to assess changes in PrEP awareness and use among MSM. From 2014 to 2017, PrEP awareness increased by 50% overall, with >80% of MSM in 17 of the 20 urban areas reporting PrEP awareness in 2017. Among MSM with likely indications for PrEP (e.g., sexual risk behaviors or recent bacterial sexually transmitted infection [STI]), use of PrEP increased by approximately 500% from 6% to 35%, with significant increases observed in all urban areas and in almost all demographic subgroups. Despite this progress, PrEP use among MSM, especially among black and Hispanic MSM, remains low. Continued efforts to improve coverage are needed to reach the goal of 90% reduction in HIV incidence by 2030. In addition to developing new ways of connecting black and Hispanic MSM to health care providers through demonstration projects, CDC has developed resources and tools such as the Prescribe HIV Prevention program to enable health care providers to integrate PrEP into their clinical care.( section sign) By routinely testing their patients for HIV, assessing HIV-negative patients for risk behaviors, and prescribing PrEP as needed, health care providers can play a critical role in this effort.

CONTEXT: Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 88 000 deaths in the United States annually and cost the United States $249 billion in 2010. There is strong scientific evidence that regulating alcohol outlet density is an effective intervention for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms, but there is no standard method for measuring this exposure. PROGRAM: We overview the strategies available for measuring outlet density, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and provide examples of how they can be applied in practice. IMPLEMENTATION: The 3 main approaches for measuring density are container-based (eg, number of outlets in a county), distance-based (eg, average distance between a college and outlets), and spatial access-based (eg, weighted distance between town center and outlets). EVALUATION: While container-based measures are the simplest to calculate and most intuitive, distance-based or spatial access-based measures are unconstrained by geopolitical boundaries and allow for assessment of clustering (an amplifier of certain alcohol-related harms). Spatial access-based measures can also be adjusted for population size/demographics but are the most resource-intensive to produce. DISCUSSION: Alcohol outlet density varies widely across and between locations and over time, which is why it is important to measure it. Routine public health surveillance of alcohol outlet density is important to identify problem areas and detect emerging ones. Distance- or spatial access-based measures of alcohol outlet density are more resource-intensive than container-based measures but provide a much more accurate assessment of exposure to alcohol outlets and can be used to assess clustering, which is particularly important when assessing the relationship between density and alcohol-related harms, such as violent crime.

CONTEXT: Excessive alcohol use is responsible for 88 000 deaths in the United States annually and cost the United States $249 billion in 2010. There is strong scientific evidence that regulating alcohol outlet density is an effective intervention for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms, but there is no standard method for measuring this exposure. PROGRAM: We overview the strategies available for measuring outlet density, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and provide examples of how they can be applied in practice. IMPLEMENTATION: The 3 main approaches for measuring density are container-based (eg, number of outlets in a county), distance-based (eg, average distance between a college and outlets), and spatial access-based (eg, weighted distance between town center and outlets). EVALUATION: While container-based measures are the simplest to calculate and most intuitive, distance-based or spatial access-based measures are unconstrained by geopolitical boundaries and allow for assessment of clustering (an amplifier of certain alcohol-related harms). Spatial access-based measures can also be adjusted for population size/demographics but are the most resource-intensive to produce. DISCUSSION: Alcohol outlet density varies widely across and between locations and over time, which is why it is important to measure it. Routine public health surveillance of alcohol outlet density is important to identify problem areas and detect emerging ones. Distance- or spatial access-based measures of alcohol outlet density are more resource-intensive than container-based measures but provide a much more accurate assessment of exposure to alcohol outlets and can be used to assess clustering, which is particularly important when assessing the relationship between density and alcohol-related harms, such as violent crime.

Limited information exists about the effectiveness of interventions to enforce laws prohibiting alcohol sales to intoxicated patrons in licensed establishments. New Mexico Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data were used to evaluate an intervention on binge drinking intensity in licensed (eg, bars) versus unlicensed (eg, homes) locations. The proportion of binge drinkers in licensed locations who consumed 8 or more drinks on a binge drinking occasion decreased from 42.1% in 2004-2005 to 22.6% in 2007-2008 (adjusted odds ratio, 0.4; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.9), while the proportion in unlicensed locations was essentially unchanged. Enhanced enforcement of overservice laws may reduce excessive drinking in licensed establishments.

OBJECTIVE: To assess spatial accessibility measures to on-premise alcohol outlets at census block, census tract, county, and state levels for the United States. METHODS: Using network analysis in a geographic information system, we computed distance-based measures (Euclidean distance, driving distance, and driving time) to on-premise alcohol outlets for the entire U.S. at the census block level. We then calculated spatial access-based measures, specifically a population-weighted spatial accessibility index and population-weighted distances (Euclidean distance, driving distance, and driving time) to alcohol outlets at the census tract, county, and state levels. A multilevel model-based sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the associations between different on-premise alcohol outlet accessibility measures and excessive drinking outcomes. RESULTS: The national average population-weighted driving time to the nearest 7 on-premise alcohol outlets was 5.89 min, and the average population-weighted driving distance was 2.63 miles. At the state level, population-weighted driving times ranged from 1.67 min (DC) to 15.29 min (Arizona). Population-weighted driving distances ranged from 0.67 miles (DC) to 7.91 miles (Arkansas). At the county level, population-weighted driving times and distances exhibited significant geographic variations, and averages for both measures increased by the degree of county rurality. The population-weighted spatial accessibility indexes were highly correlated to respective population-weighted distance measures. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that population weighted accessibility measures were more sensitive to excessive drinking outcomes than were population weighted distance measures. CONCLUSIONS: These results can be used to assess the relationship between geographic access to on-premise alcohol outlets and health outcomes. This study demonstrates a flexible and robust method that can be applied or modified to quantify spatial accessibility to public resources such as healthy food stores, medical care providers, and parks and greenspaces, as well as, quantify spatial exposure to local adverse environments such as tobacco stores and fast food restaurants.

INTRODUCTION: Binge drinking (four or more drinks for women, five or more drinks for men on an occasion) accounts for more than half of the 88,000 U.S. deaths resulting from excessive drinking annually. Adult binge drinkers do so frequently and at high intensity; however, there are known disparities in binge drinking that are not well characterized by any single binge-drinking measure. A new measure of total annual binge drinks was used to assess these disparities at the state and national levels. METHODS: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2015 data (analyzed in 2016) were used to estimate the prevalence, frequency, intensity, and total binge drinks among U.S. adults. Total annual binge drinks was calculated by multiplying annual binge-drinking episodes by binge-drinking intensity. RESULTS: In 2015, a total of 17.1% of U.S. adults (37.4 million) reported an annual average of 53.1 binge-drinking episodes per binge drinker, at an average intensity of 7.0 drinks per binge episode, resulting in 17.5 billion total binge drinks, or 467.0 binge drinks per binge drinker. Although binge drinking was more common among young adults (aged 18-34 years), half of the total binge drinks were consumed by adults aged >/=35 years. Total binge drinks per binge drinker were substantially higher among those with lower educational levels and household incomes than among those with higher educational levels and household incomes. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. adult binge drinkers consume about 17.5 billion total binge drinks annually, or about 470 binge drinks/binge drinker. Monitoring total binge drinks can help characterize disparities in binge drinking and help plan and evaluate effective prevention strategies.

INTRODUCTION: Carcinogen exposure and unhealthy habits acquired in young adulthood can set the stage for the development of cancer at older ages. This study measured the current prevalence of several cancer risk factors among young adults to assess opportunities to intervene to change the prevalence of these risk factors and potentially reduce cancer incidence. METHODS: Using 2015 National Health Interview Survey data (analyzed in 2016), the prevalence of potential cancer risk factors was estimated among U.S. adults aged 18-44 years, based on responses to questions about diet, physical activity, tobacco product use, alcohol, indoor tanning, sleep, human papillomavirus vaccine receipt, and obesity, stratified by sex, age, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: The prevalence of some risk factors varied by age and race/ethnicity. Obesity (one in four people) and insufficient sleep (one in three people) were common among men and women. Physical inactivity (one in five men, one in four women); binge drinking (one in four men, one in eight women); cigarette smoking (one in five men, one in seven women); and frequent consumption of red meat (one in four men, one in six women) also were common. More than half of the population of adults aged 18-44 years consumed sugar-sweetened beverages daily and processed meat at least once a week. Most young adults had never had the human papillomavirus vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Findings can be used to target evidence-based environmental and policy interventions to reduce the prevalence of cancer risk factors among young adults and prevent the development of future cancers.

Excessive drinking accounted for approximately 4,300 deaths each year among persons aged <21 years during 2006-2010,* and underage drinking cost the United States $24.3 billion in 2010 (1). CDC analyzed data from the national Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) for the years 1991-2015 to examine trends in drinking by U.S. high school students, and from the 2015 YRBS to assess the usual source of alcohol consumeddagger and binge drinking intensity (i.e., the average number of drinks consumed per binge drinking occasion). section sign During 1991-2007, the prevalence of current drinking paragraph sign among high school students declined significantly, from 50.8% (1991) to 44.7% (2007), and then significantly declined to 32.8% in 2015. The prevalence of binge drinking** increased from 31.3% in 1991 to 31.5% in 1999, and then significantly declined to 17.7% in 2015. Most high school students who drank were binge drinkers (57.8%), and 43.8% of binge drinkers consumed eight or more drinks in a row. Despite progress, current drinking and binge drinking are common among high school students, and many students who binge drink do so at high intensity (i.e., eight or more drinks in a row). Widespread use of evidence-based strategies for preventing excessive drinking (e.g., increasing alcohol taxes, regulating alcohol outlet density, and having commercial host liability laws) could help reduce underage drinking and related harms.

Excessive and/or risky alcohol use resulted in $249 billion in economic costs in 2010 (1) and >88,000 deaths in the United States every year from 2006 to 2010 (2). It is associated with birth defects and disabilities (e.g., fetal alcohol spectrum disorders [FASDs]), increases in chronic diseases (e.g., heart disease and breast cancer), and injuries and violence (e.g., motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide).dagger Since 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended alcohol misuse screening and brief counseling (also known as alcohol screening and brief intervention or ASBI) for adults aged ≥18 years (3). section sign Among adults, ASBI reduces episodes of binge-level consumption, reduces weekly alcohol consumption, and increases compliance with recommended drinking limits in those who have an intervention in comparison to those who do not (3). A recent study suggested that health care providers rarely talk with patients about alcohol use (4). To estimate the prevalence of U.S. adults who reported receiving elements of ASBI, CDC analyzed 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data from 17 states paragraph sign and the District of Columbia (DC). Weighted crude and age-standardized overall and state-level prevalence estimates were calculated by selected drinking patterns and demographic characteristics. Overall, 77.7% of adults (age-standardized estimate) reported being asked about alcohol use by a health professional in person or on a form during a checkup, but only 32.9% reported being asked about binge-level alcohol consumption (3). Among binge drinkers, only 37.2% reported being asked about alcohol use and advised about the harms of drinking too much, and only 18.1% reported being asked about alcohol use and advised to reduce or quit drinking. Widespread implementation of ASBI and other evidence-based interventions could help reduce excessive alcohol use in adults and related harms.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Persons living in rural areas are recognized as a health disparity population because the prevalence of disease and rate of premature death are higher than for the overall population of the United States. Surveillance data about health-related behaviors are rarely reported by urban-rural status, which makes comparisons difficult among persons living in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties. REPORTING PERIOD: 2013. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) is an ongoing, state-based, random-digit-dialed landline- and cellular-telephone survey of noninstitutionalized adults aged ≥18 years residing in the United States. BRFSS collects data on health-risk behaviors, chronic diseases and conditions, access to health care, and use of preventive health services related to the leading causes of death and disability. BRFSS data were analyzed for 398,208 adults aged ≥18 years to estimate the prevalence of five self-reported health-related behaviors (sufficient sleep, current nonsmoking, nondrinking or moderate drinking, maintaining normal body weight, and meeting aerobic leisure time physical activity recommendations) by urban-rural status. For this report, rural is defined as the noncore counties described in the 2013 National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural Classification Scheme for Counties. RESULTS: Approximately one third of U.S. adults practice at least four of these five behaviors. Compared with adults living in the four types of metropolitan counties (large central metropolitan, large fringe metropolitan, medium metropolitan, and small metropolitan), adults living in the two types of nonmetropolitan counties (micropolitan and noncore) did not differ in the prevalence of sufficient sleep; had higher prevalence of nondrinking or moderate drinking; and had lower prevalence of current nonsmoking, maintaining normal body weight, and meeting aerobic leisure time physical activity recommendations. The overall age-adjusted prevalence of reporting at least four of the five health-related behaviors was 30.4%. The prevalence among the estimated 13.3 million adults living in noncore counties was lower (27.0%) than among those in micropolitan counties (28.8%), small metropolitan counties (29.5%), medium metropolitan counties (30.5%), large fringe metropolitan counties (30.2%), and large metropolitan centers (31.7%). INTERPRETATION: This is the first report of the prevalence of these five health-related behaviors for the six urban-rural categories. Nonmetropolitan counties have lower prevalence of three and clustering of at least four health-related behaviors that are associated with the leading chronic disease causes of death. Prevalence of sufficient sleep was consistently low and did not differ by urban-rural status. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Chronic disease prevention efforts focus on improving the communities, schools, worksites, and health systems in which persons live, learn, work, and play. Evidence-based strategies to improve health-related behaviors in the population of the United States can be used to reach the Healthy People 2020 objectives for these five self-reported health-related behaviors (sufficient sleep, current nonsmoking, nondrinking or moderate drinking, maintaining normal body weight, and meeting aerobic leisure time physical activity recommendations). These findings suggest an ongoing need to increase public awareness and public education, particularly in rural counties where prevalence of these health-related behaviors is lowest.

INTRODUCTION: Five key health-related behaviors for chronic disease prevention are never smoking, getting regular physical activity, consuming no alcohol or only moderate amounts, maintaining a normal body weight, and obtaining daily sufficient sleep. The objective of this study was to estimate the clustering of these 5 health-related behaviors among adults aged 21 years or older in each state and the District of Columbia and to assess geographic variation in clustering. METHODS: We used data from the 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) to assess the clustering of the 5 behaviors among 395,343 BRFSS respondents aged 21 years or older. The 5 behaviors were defined as currently not smoking cigarettes, meeting the aerobic physical activity recommendation, consuming no alcohol or only moderate amounts, maintaining a normal body mass index (BMI), and sleeping at least 7 hours per 24-hour period. Prevalence of having 4 or 5 of these behaviors, by state, was also examined. RESULTS: Among US adults, 81.6% were current nonsmokers, 63.9% obtained 7 hours or more sleep per day, 63.1% reported moderate or no alcohol consumption, 50.4% met physical activity recommendations, and 32.5% had a normal BMI. Only 1.4% of respondents engaged in none of the 5 behaviors; 8.4%, 1 behavior; 24.3%, 2 behaviors; 35.4%, 3 behaviors; and 24.3%, 4 behaviors; only 6.3% reported engaging in all 5 behaviors. The highest prevalence of engaging in 4 or 5 behaviors was clustered in the Pacific and Rocky Mountain states. Lowest prevalence was in the southern states and along the Ohio River. CONCLUSION: Additional efforts are needed to increase the proportion of the population that engages in all 5 health-related behaviors and to eliminate geographic variation. Collaborative efforts in health care systems, communities, work sites, and schools can promote all 5 behaviors and produce population-wide changes, especially among the socioeconomically disadvantaged.

INTRODUCTION: Excessive alcohol consumption was responsible for approximately 4,300 annual deaths in the United States among people younger than 21 from 2006 through 2010. Underage drinking cost the United States $24.6 billion in 2006. Previous studies have shown that liquor is the most common type of alcohol consumed by high school students. However, little is known about the types of liquor consumed by youth or about the mixing of alcohol with energy drinks. METHODS: The 2011 Michigan Youth Tobacco Survey was used to assess usual alcohol beverage consumption and liquor consumption and the mixing of alcohol with energy drinks by Michigan high school students. Beverage preferences were analyzed by demographic characteristics and drinking patterns. RESULTS: Overall, 34.2% of Michigan high school students consumed alcohol in the past month, and 20.8% reported binge drinking. Among current drinkers, liquor was the most common type of alcohol consumed (51.2%), and vodka was the most prevalent type of liquor consumed by those who drank liquor (53.0%). The prevalence of liquor consumption was similar among binge drinkers and nonbinge drinkers, but binge drinkers who drank liquor were significantly more likely than nonbinge drinkers to consume vodka and to mix alcohol with energy drinks (49.0% vs 18.2%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Liquor is the most common type of alcoholic beverage consumed by Michigan high school students; vodka is the most common type of liquor consumed. Mixing alcohol and energy drinks is common, particularly among binge drinkers. Community Guide strategies for reducing excessive drinking (eg, increasing alcohol taxes) can reduce underage drinking.

Excessive alcohol use is risk factor for a wide range of health and social problems including liver cirrhosis, certain cancers, depression, motor vehicle crashes, and violence. Alcohol use during pregnancy can lead to fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs) and other adverse birth outcomes . Community studies estimate that as many as 2% to 5% of first grade students in the United States might have an FASD, which include physical, behavioral, or learning impairments. In 2005, the Surgeon General reissued an advisory urging women who are or might be pregnant to abstain from alcohol consumption to eliminate the risk for FASDs or other negative birth outcomes. To estimate current prevalences of any alcohol use and binge drinking (consuming four or more drinks on an occasion) among pregnant and nonpregnant women aged 18-44 years in the United States, CDC analyzed 2011-2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data. Among pregnant women, the prevalences of any alcohol use and binge drinking in the past 30 days were 10.2% and 3.1%, respectively. Among nonpregnant women, the prevalences of any alcohol use and binge drinking in the past 30 days were 53.6% and 18.2%, respectively. Among binge drinkers, pregnant women reported a significantly higher frequency of binge drinking than nonpregnant women (4.6 and 3.1 episodes, respectively); the largest amount consumed during binge drinking was also higher among pregnant women than nonpregnant women (7.5 versus 6.0 drinks), although this difference was not statistically significant. Implementation of evidence-based clinical and community-level strategies would be expected to reduce binge drinking among pregnant women and women of childbearing age, and any alcohol consumption among women who are or might be pregnant. Healthcare professionals can support these efforts by implementing alcohol screening and brief interventions in their primary care practices, and informing women that there is no known safe level of alcohol consumption when they are pregnant or might be pregnant.

INTRODUCTION: Regulating alcohol outlet density is an evidence-based strategy for reducing excessive drinking. However, the effect of this strategy on violent crime has not been well characterized. A reduction in alcohol outlet density in the Buckhead neighborhood of Atlanta from 2003 through 2007 provided an opportunity to evaluate this effect. METHODS: We conducted a community-based longitudinal study to evaluate the impact of changes in alcohol outlet density on violent crime in Buckhead compared with 2 other cluster areas in Atlanta (Midtown and Downtown) with high densities of alcohol outlets, from 1997 through 2002 (preintervention) to 2003 through 2007 (postintervention). The relationship between exposures to on-premises retail alcohol outlets and violent crime were assessed by using annual spatially defined indices at the census block level. Multilevel regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between changes in exposure to on-premises alcohol outlets and violent crime while controlling for potential census block-level confounders. RESULTS: A 3% relative reduction in alcohol outlet density in Buckhead from 1997-2002 to 2003-2007 was associated with a 2-fold greater reduction in exposure to violent crime than occurred in Midtown or Downtown, where exposure to on-premises retail alcohol outlets increased. The magnitude of the association between exposure to alcohol outlets and violent crime was 2 to 5 times greater in Buckhead than in either Midtown or Downtown during the postintervention period. CONCLUSIONS: A modest reduction in alcohol outlet density can substantially reduce exposure to violent crime in neighborhoods with high density of alcohol outlets. Routine monitoring of community exposure to alcohol outlets could also inform the regulation of alcohol outlet density, consistent with Guide to Community Preventive Services recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Men who have sex with men (MSM) represent over half of new HIV infections in the United States. It is important to understand the factors associated with engaging in risky sexual behavior to develop effective prevention interventions. Binge drinking (≥5 drinks on ≥1 occasion) is the most common form of excessive alcohol consumption. This study examines the relationship between binge drinking and sexual risk behaviors among MSM who are current drinkers and who were either HIV-negative or unaware of their HIV status. METHODS: Using the 2011 National HIV Behavioral Surveillance system and multivariable Poisson models with robust error estimates, we assessed the association between binge drinking and sexual risk behaviors among current drinkers. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are presented. RESULTS: Overall, 85% of MSM were current drinkers, and 59% of MSM who drank reported ≥1 episode of binge drinking in the preceding 30 days. In multivariable models, binge drinking was associated with condomless anal intercourse (CAI) at last sex with an HIV-positive or unknown status partner (receptive: PR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6; insertive: PR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4), having exchanged sex for money or drugs at last sex (PR: 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7), having concurrent partners in the past year (PR: 1.1, 95% CI 1.1-1.2), and having more CAI partners in the past year (PR: 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4) compared to non-binge drinkers. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based strategies for reducing binge drinking could help reduce risky sexual behavior among MSM.

Excessive alcohol use accounted for an average of one in 10 deaths among working-age adults (aged 20-64 years) in the United States each year during 2006-2010, and cost the United States $223.5 billion in 2006. Binge drinking, defined as consuming four or more drinks for women or five or more drinks for men on an occasion, was responsible for more than half of these deaths and three fourths of the economic costs. Binge drinking also is responsible for many health and social problems, including alcohol poisoning. Yet, approximately 38 million U.S. adults report binge drinking an average of four times per month, and consume an average of eight drinks per binge episode. Most binge drinkers (90%) are not alcohol dependent.

INTRODUCTION: Excessive alcohol consumption is responsible for 88,000 deaths annually and cost the United States $223.5 billion in 2006. It is often assumed that most excessive drinkers are alcohol dependent. However, few studies have examined the prevalence of alcohol dependence among excessive drinkers. The objective of this study was to update prior estimates of the prevalence of alcohol dependence among US adult drinkers. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 138,100 adults who responded to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Drinking patterns (ie, past-year drinking, excessive drinking, and binge drinking) were assessed by sociodemographic characteristics and alcohol dependence (assessed through self-reported survey responses and defined as meeting ≥3 of 7 criteria for dependence in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition). RESULTS: Excessive drinking, binge drinking, and alcohol dependence were most common among men and those aged 18 to 24. Binge drinking was most common among those with annual family incomes of $75,000 or more, whereas alcohol dependence was most common among those with annual family incomes of less than $25,000. The prevalence of alcohol dependence was 10.2% among excessive drinkers, 10.5% among binge drinkers, and 1.3% among non-binge drinkers. A positive relationship was found between alcohol dependence and binge drinking frequency. CONCLUSION: Most excessive drinkers (90%) did not meet the criteria for alcohol dependence. A comprehensive approach to reducing excessive drinking that emphasizes evidence-based policy strategies and clinical preventive services could have an impact on reducing excessive drinking in addition to focusing on the implementation of addiction treatment services.

AIMS: To understand how US cancer control plans address alcohol use, an important but frequently overlooked cancer risk factor, and how many US adults are at risk. METHODS: We reviewed alcohol control efforts in 69 comprehensive cancer control plans in US states, tribes and jurisdictions. Using the 2011 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed the prevalence of current alcohol use among US adults and the proportion of these drinkers who exceeded guidelines for moderate drinking. RESULTS: Most comprehensive cancer control plans acknowledged alcohol use as a cancer risk factor but fewer than half included a goal, objective or strategy to address alcohol use. More than half of US adults reported current alcohol use in 2011, and two of three drinkers exceeded moderate drinking guidelines at least once in the past month. Many states that did not address alcohol use in comprehensive cancer control plans also had a high proportion of adults at risk. CONCLUSION: Alcohol use is a common cancer risk factor in the USA, but alcohol control strategies are not commonly included in comprehensive cancer control plans. Supporting the implementation of evidence-based strategies to prevent the excessive use of alcohol is one tool the cancer control community can use to reduce the risk of cancer.