Crime Against Persons with Disabilities, 2009-2015

…for each age group measured except persons age 65 or older, the rate of violent victimization against persons with disabilities was at least 2.5 times the unadjusted rate for those without disabilities.

…persons with cognitive disabilities had the highest victimization rate among the disability types measured for total violent crime…

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) – Crime Against Persons with Disabilities, 2009-2015 – Statistical Tables

Erika Harrell, Ph.D., BJS Statistician

July 11, 2017    NCJ 250632

Presents 2009-2015 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) estimates of nonfatal violent crime (rape or sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault) against persons age 12 or older with disabilities. Disabilities are classified according to six limitations: hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living. The report compares the victimization of persons with and without disabilities living in noninstitutionalized households, including distributions by sex, race, Hispanic origin, age, disability type, and other victim characteristics. It also includes crime characteristics, such as victim-offender relationship, time of crime, reporting to police, and use of victim services agencies. NCVS data were combined with data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey to generate victimization rates.

Highlights:

  • During the 5-year aggregate period from 2011 to 2015, for each age group measured except persons age 65 or older, the rate of violent victimization against persons with disabilities was at least 2.5 times the unadjusted rate for those without disabilities.
  • Among those with disabilities, persons ages 12 to 15 (144.1 per 1,000 age 12 or older) had the highest rate of violent victimization among all age groups measured.
  • The rate of violent victimization against males with disabilities was 31.8 per 1,000, compared to 14.1 per 1,000 males without disabilities.
  • For females with disabilities, the rate of violent victimization was 32.8 per 1,000, compared to 11.4 per 1,000 females without disabilities.
  • Males and females had similar rates of total violent victimization in every disability type measured, except independent living disabilities.

Part of the Crime Against People with Disabilities Series

Summary (PDF 197K)
PDF (1M)
ASCII file (27K)
Comma-delimited format (CSV) (Zip format 46K)

Help for using BJS products

About the Source Data
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)
To cite this product, use the following link:
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5986

View All Publications and Products

Mirror, Mirror 2017: International Comparison Reflects Flaws and Opportunities for Better U.S. Health Care

In the United States—more than in 11 other wealthy countries—the health care you receive varies with your level of income, according to a new Commonwealth Fund report.

Source: Mirror, Mirror 2017: International Comparison Reflects Flaws and Opportunities for Better U.S. Health Care

The United States Health System Falls Short

 The United States spends far more on health care than other high-income countries, with spending levels that rose continuously over the past three decades (Exhibit 1). Yet the U.S. population has poorer health than other countries. 1 Life expectancy, after improving for several decades, worsened in recent years for some populations, aggravated by the opioid crisis. 2 In addition, as the baby boom population ages, more people in the U.S.—and all over the world—are living with age-related disabilities and chronic disease, placing pressure on health care systems to respond.

Timely and accessible health care could mitigate many of these challenges, but the U.S. health care system falls short, failing to deliver indicated services reliably to all who could benefit. 3 In particular, poor access to primary care has contributed to inadequate prevention and management of chronic diseases, delayed diagnoses, incomplete adherence to treatments, wasteful overuse of drugs and technologies, and coordination and safety problems.

This report uses recent data to compare health care system performance in the U.S. with that of 10 other high-income countries and considers the different approaches to health care organization and delivery that can contribute to top performance. We based our analysis on 72 indicators that measure performance in five domains important to policymakers, providers, patients, and the public: Care Process, Access, Administrative Efficiency, Equity, and Health Care Outcomes.

Our data come from a variety of sources. One is comparative survey research. Since 1998, The Commonwealth Fund, in collaboration with international partners, has supported surveys of patients and primary care physicians in advanced countries, collecting information for a standardized set of metrics on health system performance. Other comparative data are drawn from the most recent reports of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Continue Reading

How to Make Healthcare Accessible for All

Source: University of Washington, Healthy Aging RRTC

Healthcare access is important for all individuals, especially for people with disabilities. However, people with disabilities don’t always receive the healthcare they need. Several barriers can make it harder for them to access critical healthcare services or build optimal working relationships with their providers. Fortunately, by being aware of these barriers, we can overcome them with changes in design, training, and policy.

Download How to Make Healthcare Accessible for All

The Community Guide to Adult Oral Health Program Implementation

Source: The Oral Health Website

Download Oral Health Guide

The Community Guide to Adult Oral Health Program Implementation (Oral Health Guide), along with the corresponding online database of community-based oral health programs, aims to help groups at the state and local levels start or enhance their own oral health programs for older adults. Here, community-based entities can find key tips, case studies, interactive tools, and other sources of support for creating cost-effective, sustainable programs. The Oral Health Guide can help you replicate or expand an existing program or take steps to design and implement a new program. In addition, recognizing the connection between oral health and overall health, the Oral Health Guide contains advice and links to resources concerning interprofessional collaboration to serve older adults’ oral health needs.

The Oral Health Guide begins with an introduction and includes the following eight key steps to implementation:

  1. Conduct a Needs Assessment: Assessing the specific oral health needs of older adults in your community is a vital first step to implementation.
  2. Develop a Vision, Mission, and Goals: Developing your program’s vision, mission, and goals helps ensure that staff and community partners are working toward a common objective.
  3. Establish Partnerships: Collaborating with a variety of organizations can help strengthen the planning process for a community-based oral health program for older adults and can expand the program’s impact.
  4. Design the Program: As you define your program’s scope, you might choose to replicate, or copy, an existing program; adapt an existing program; or design an entirely new program.
  5. Finance the Program: Obtaining funding is an important step to starting your program and sustaining it over the long term.
  6. Implement the Program: You must consider several key steps as you proceed from planning and preparation to program operations and services delivery.
  7. Evaluate the Program: During the early planning stages of your program, before you start serving older adults, developing an evaluation plan that reflects your program’s vision and mission is imperative.
  8. Ensure Sustainability: Sharing your program results with partners, funders, and other community stakeholders is fundamental to maintain existing relationships, attract support and buy-in from your community, and thereby ensure your program’s long-term sustainability.

The Oral Health Guide also contains an appendix of funding sources for existing oral health programs and acknowledgments for individuals who helped develop the Oral Health Guide.

You can also download a hardcopy version of the Oral Health Guide (PDF, 1.9 MB).

Doctors With Disabilities: Why They’re Important – The New York Times

There’s good reason to believe a more diverse work force — one that includes doctors with disabilities — would be good for patients and doctors. Patients of various backgrounds tend to feel more comfortable with physicians like them, and that’s true for people with disabilities as well.

Source: Doctors With Disabilities: Why They’re Important – The New York Times

More than 20 percent of Americans — nearly 57 million people — live with a disability, including 8 percent of children and 10 percent of nonelderly adults. And while the medical profession is devoted to caring for the ill, often it doesn’t do enough to meet the needs of the disabled.

Read entire article… Doctors With Disabilities- Why They’re Important – NYTimes

 

Dr. Gregory Snyder, a physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, has paralysis in his legs after a spinal cord injury during medical school. He uses a wheelchair and says that he’s sometimes mistaken for a patient while working. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

“It reminds us that at some point we’ll all be patients,” he said. “And perhaps, when we least expect it.”

Over the course of our lives, most of us will acquire a disability: More than two thirds of Americans over the age of 80 have a motor, sensory or cognitive impairment.

Dr. Snyder remembers the difficulty of adjusting to life as a patient after his accident, and the long road to recovery. But he says his disability and rehabilitation have fundamentally changed the way he cares for patients — for the better.

“I would have been this six-foot-tall, blond-haired, blue-eyed Caucasian doctor standing at the foot of the bed in a white coat,” he said. “Now I’m a guy in a wheelchair sitting right next to my patients. They know I’ve been in that bed just like they have. And I think that means something.”

There’s good reason to believe a more diverse work force — one that includes doctors with disabilities — would be good for patients and doctors. Patients of various backgrounds tend to feel more comfortable with physicians like them, and that’s true for people with disabilities as well.

Opioid Prescribing: Where you live matters

Source: Opioid Prescribing: Where you live matters

Download Opioid Factsheet

The amount of opioids prescribed in the US peaked in 2010 and then decreased each year through 2015. However, prescribing remains high and vary widely from county to county. Healthcare providers began using opioids in the late 1990s to treat chronic pain (not related to cancer), such as arthritis and back pain. As this continued, more opioid prescriptions were written, for more days per prescription, in higher doses. Taking opioids for longer periods of time or in higher doses increases the risk of addiction, overdose, and death. In 2015, six times more opioids per resident were dispensed in the highest-prescribing counties than in the lowest-prescribing counties. County-level characteristics, such as rural versus urban, income level, and demographics, only explained about a third of the differences. This suggests that people receive different care depending on where they live.  Healthcare providers have an important role in offering safer and more effective pain treatment.

Healthcare providers can:

  • Follow the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain, which includes recommendations such as:
    • Use opioids only when benefits are likely to outweigh risks.
    • Start with the lowest effective dose of immediate-release opioids.  For acute pain, prescribe only the number of days that the pain is expected to be severe enough to require opioids.
    • Reassess benefits and risks if considering dose increases.
  • Use state-based prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) which help identify patients at risk of addiction or overdose.

Women with Disabilities Need Better Access to Preventive Cancer Screening

Source: University of New Hampshire, Disability and Public Health Project (NH UCEDD)

In NH, women with disabilities are significantly less likely than the general population to comply with breast and cervical cancer screening recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Preventive screenings are especially challenging for women with disabilities due to barriers, such as:

  • Lack of accessible health care facilities and medical equipment; and
  • Health care providers who lack cultural competence with disability and awareness of needed accommodation.

Download Disability & Women’s Health

Adults with Disabilities Need Better Diabetes Prevention Care

Source: University of New Hampshire, Disability and Public Health Project (NH UCEDD)

In New Hampshire, adults with mobility and cognitive limitations are significantly more likely to experience diabetes (26%) than adults with no disability (9%).1 The disparity in diabetes prevalence results in higher costs to Medicaid programs and poorer health outcomes and quality of life for people with disabilities.Several factors contribute to a higher risk of diabetes, including:

  • Unhealthy eating habits that result, in part, from uninformed and limited food choices;

  • Lack of physical activity due to social, environmental, and behavioral barriers; and

  • Lack of knowledge and support to address risk factors for diabetes.2

Download Diabetes Prevention

Include “Low-Tech” Options to Share Health Information with People with Disabilities

Source: University of New Hampshire, Disability and Public Health Project (NH UCEDD)

Adults with disabilities in New Hampshire (NH) are significantly less likely than adults without disabilities to have access to information electronically. This can affect access to:

  • Online communities that encourage healthy behaviors;
  • Electronic health records & appointment reminders;
  • Knowledge & strategies to maintain & improve health.

Download Health Communication Needs