BackgroundIn the United States, doctor-diagnosed arthritis is a common and disabling chronic condition. Arthritis can lead to severe joint pain and poor physical function, and it can negatively affect quality of life.MethodsCDC analyzed 2013–2015 data from the National Health Interview Survey, an annual, nationally representative, in-person interview survey of the health status and behaviors of the noninstitutionalized civilian U.S. adult population, to update previous prevalence estimates of arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitations.ResultsOn average, during 2013–2015, 54.4 million (22.7%) adults had doctor-diagnosed arthritis, and 23.7 million (43.5% of those with arthritis) had arthritis-attributable activity limitations (an age-adjusted increase of approximately 20% in the proportion of adults with arthritis reporting activity limitations since 2002 [p-trend <0.001]). Among adults with heart disease, diabetes, and obesity, the prevalences of doctor-diagnosed arthritis were 49.3%, 47.1%, and 30.6%, respectively; the prevalences of arthritis-attributable activity limitations among adults with these conditions and arthritis were 54.5% (heart disease), 54.0% (diabetes), and 49.0% (obesity).Conclusions and CommentsThe prevalence of arthritis is high, particularly among adults with comorbid conditions, such as heart disease, diabetes, and obesity. Furthermore, the prevalence of arthritis-attributable activity limitations is high and increasing over time. Approximately half of adults with arthritis and heart disease, arthritis and diabetes, or arthritis and obesity are limited by their arthritis. Greater use of evidence-based physical activity and self-management education interventions can reduce pain and improve function and quality of life for adults with arthritis and also for adults with other chronic conditions who might be limited by their arthritis.

Objective To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis. Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. Results The guideline addresses treatment with disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high‐risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional). Conclusion This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision‐making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision‐making process based on patients’ values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

Objective To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis. Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. Results The guideline addresses treatment with disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high‐risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional). Conclusion This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision‐making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision‐making process based on patients’ values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

Objective To update the projected prevalence of arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitations among US adults, using a newer baseline for estimates. Methods Baseline prevalence data were obtained from the 2010–2012 National Health Interview Survey. Arthritis was defined as an answer of “yes” to the question “Have you ever been told by a doctor or other health professional that you have some form of arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, lupus or fibromyalgia?” Arthritis-attributable activity limitation was defined as an answer of “yes” to the question “Are you limited in any way in any of your usual activities because of arthritis or joint symptoms?” The baseline prevalence of arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation was stratified according to age and sex and was statistically weighted to account for the complex survey design. The projected prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation was calculated by multiplying the age- and sex-stratified population estimates projected for 2015–2040 (in 5-year intervals; provided by the US Census Bureau) by the baseline estimates. Age-and sex-specific prevalences were summed to provide the total prevalence estimates for each year. Results In 2010–2012, 52.5 million adults in the US (22.7% of all adults) had doctor-diagnosed arthritis, and 22.7 million (9.8%) had arthritis-attributable activity limitation. By 2040, the number of US adults with doctor-diagnosed arthritis is projected to increase 49% to 78.4 million (25.9% of all adults), and the number of adults with arthritis-attributable activity limitation will increase 52% to 34.6 million (11.4% of all adults). Conclusion Updated projections suggest that arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation will remain large and growing problems for clinical and public health systems, which must plan and create policies and resources to address these future needs.

On May 18, 2021, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr).Approximately 60 million persons in the United States live in rural counties, representing almost one fifth (19.3%) of the population.* In September 2020, COVID-19 incidence (cases per 100,000 population) in rural counties surpassed that in urban counties (1). Rural communities often have a higher proportion of residents who lack health insurance, live with comorbidities or disabilities, are aged ≥65 years, and have limited access to health care facilities with intensive care capabilities, which places these residents at increased risk for COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality (2,3). To better understand COVID-19 vaccination disparities across the urban-rural continuum, CDC analyzed county-level vaccine administration data among adults aged ≥18 years who received their first dose of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, or a single dose of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (Johnson & Johnson) during December 14, 2020-April 10, 2021 in 50 U.S. jurisdictions (49 states and the District of Columbia [DC]). Adult COVID-19 vaccination coverage was lower in rural counties (38.9%) than in urban counties (45.7%) overall and among adults aged 18-64 years (29.1% rural, 37.7% urban), those aged ≥65 years (67.6% rural, 76.1% urban), women (41.7% rural, 48.4% urban), and men (35.3% rural, 41.9% urban). Vaccination coverage varied among jurisdictions: 36 jurisdictions had higher coverage in urban counties, five had higher coverage in rural counties, and five had similar coverage (i.e., within 1%) in urban and rural counties; in four jurisdictions with no rural counties, the urban-rural comparison could not be assessed. A larger proportion of persons in the most rural counties (14.6%) traveled for vaccination to nonadjacent counties (i.e., farther from their county of residence) compared with persons in the most urban counties (10.3%). As availability of COVID-19 vaccines expands, public health practitioners should continue collaborating with health care providers, pharmacies, employers, faith leaders, and other community partners to identify and address barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in rural areas (2).Data on COVID-19 vaccine doses administered in the United States are reported to CDC by jurisdictions, pharmacies, and