Skip to main content
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report logoLink to Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
. 2014 Nov 7;63(44):999–1003.

Arthritis Among Veterans — United States, 2011–2013

Louise B Murphy 1,, Charles G Helmick 1, Kelli D Allen 2, Kristina A Theis 1, Nancy A Baker 1, Glen R Murray 3, Jin Qin 1, Jennifer M Hootman 1, Teresa J Brady 1, Kamil E Barbour 1
PMCID: PMC5779484  PMID: 25375071

Arthritis is among the most common chronic conditions among veterans and is more prevalent among veterans than nonveterans (1,2). Contemporary population-based estimates of arthritis prevalence among veterans are needed because previous population-based studies predate the Persian Gulf War (1), were small (2), or studied men only (2) despite the fact that women comprise an increasing proportion of military personnel and typically have a higher prevalence of arthritis than men (1,3). To address this knowledge gap, CDC analyzed combined 2011, 2012, and 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data among all adults aged ≥18 years, by veteran status, to estimate the total and sex-specific prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis overall and by sociodemographic categories, and the state-specific prevalence (overall and sex-specific) of doctor-diagnosed arthritis. This report summarizes the results of these analyses, which found that one in four veterans reported that they had arthritis (25.6%) and that prevalence was higher among veterans than nonveterans across most sociodemographic categories, including sex (prevalence among male and female veterans was 25.0% and 31.3%, respectively). State-specific, age-standardized arthritis prevalence among veterans ranged from 18.8% in Hawaii to 32.7% in West Virginia. Veterans comprise a large and important target group for reducing the growing burden of arthritis. Those interested in veterans’ health can help to improve the quality of life of veterans by ensuring that they have access to affordable, evidence-based, physical activity and self-management education classes that reduce the adverse effects of arthritis (e.g., pain and depression) and its common comorbidities (e.g., heart disease and diabetes).

BRFSS is an annual, cross-sectional, random-digit–dialed telephone (landline and cell phone) survey of the 50 U.S. states, territories, and the District of Columbia (DC). BRFSS is designed to collect data that are representative of the noninstitutionalized adult civilian population in each state. All analyses used combined 2011, 2012, and 2013 BRFSS data. Median state-specific BRFSS response rates, based on American Association for Public Opinion Research definition no. 4, were 49.7% in 2011, 45.2% in 2012, and 45.9% in 2013.* BRFSS respondents were defined as having arthritis if they responded “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?” Veterans were defined as those who responded “yes” to the question, “Have you ever served on active duty in the United States Armed Forces, either in the regular military or in a National Guard or military Reserve unit? Active duty does not include training for the Reserves or National Guard, but does include activation, for example, for the Persian Gulf War.”

CDC estimated annualized crude and age-specific prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis stratified by veteran status and sex, age-standardized overall and sex-specific prevalence by veteran status across categories of race/ethnicity, highest educational attainment, employment status, income, and body mass index (under/normal weight, overweight, and obese), age-standardized prevalence overall and by sex among veterans for the 50 states, DC, Guam, and Puerto Rico. Data were analyzed using software that accounted for the complex sampling design, including application of sampling weights so that estimates were representative of the noninstitutionalized adult civilian population in each state. Variance was estimated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) that accounted for the clustered design using the Taylor series linearization method. The 2000 U.S. Projected Population, in three age groups (18–44, 45–64, and ≥65 years) was used for age-standardization.

Veterans had a higher overall prevalence of reported arthritis than nonveterans, 25.6% (CI = 25.2%–26.1%) versus 23.6% (CI = 23.4%–23.7%). For both men and women, arthritis prevalence was higher among veterans than nonveterans (Table 1). Among male veterans (compared with male nonveterans) arthritis prevalence was higher for all age groups, and age-standardized arthritis prevalence was ≥5 percentage points higher across most of the sociodemographic categories examined (race/ethnicity, education, income, employment status, and body mass index) (Table 1). Among female veterans (compared with female nonveterans) arthritis prevalence was higher for young (18–44 years) and middle aged (44–64 years) women; age-standardized arthritis prevalence was ≥5 percentage points higher across most of the sociodemographic categories examined (Table 1). Of the estimated 9.0 million veterans with arthritis, 8.3 million were men and 670,000 were women.

TABLE 1.

Crude, age-specific, and age-standardized* estimated prevalence of arthritis among veterans and nonveterans, by sex and selected sociodemographic characteristics — United States, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys

Sex-specific

Men (n = 586,401) Women (n = 875,889) Overall (N = 1,464,060)



Nonveterans (n = 417,572) Veterans (n = 168,829) Nonveterans (n = 860,024) Veterans (n = 15,865) Nonveterans (n = 1,277,596) Veterans (n = 111,934)






Characteristic No. % 95% CI No. % 95% CI No. % 95% CI No. % 95% CI No. % 95% CI No. % 95% CI
Overall
 Crude 98,604 17.6 (17.4 – 17.8) 66,723 35.0 (34.6 – 35.4) 324,533 28.9 (28.7 – 29.1) 6,037 31.3 (29.9 – 32.7) 423,137 24.0 (23.8 – 24.1) 72,760 34.7 (34.3 – 35.1)
 Age-standardized 98,103 19.5 (19.3 – 19.7) 66,385 25.0 (24.5 – 25.4) 321,422 26.1 (26.0 – 26.3) 5,963 31.3 (29.9 – 32.7) 419,525 23.6 (23.4 – 23.7) 72,348 25.6 (25.2 – 26.1)
Age group (yrs)
 18–44 12,309 6.9 (6.7–7.2) 2,473 11.6 (10.9–12.4) 24,859 9.8 (9.6–10.0) 813 17.3 (15.3–19.5) 37,168 8.4 (8.3–8.6) 3,286 12.6 (11.9–13.3)
 45–64 52,662 27.4 (27.0–27.8) 19,514 36.0 (35.3–36.8) 126,332 36.8 (36.5–37.2) 2,942 40.3 (38.1–42.4) 178,994 32.7 (32.5–33.0) 22,456 36.4 (35.7–37.1)
 ≥65 33,132 44.5 (43.8–45.3) 44,398 47.1 (46.5–47.7) 170,231 58.2 (57.9–58.6) 2,208 58.9 (55.8–61.8) 203,363 54.6 (54.3–54.9) 46,606 47.4 (46.8–48.0)
Race/Ethnicity §
 White, non-Hispanic 78,495 21.2 (21.0–21.5) 55,836 25.1 (24.6–25.7) 258,029 27.2 (27.0–27.4) 4,549 31.8 (30.2–33.4) 336,524 24.9 (24.7–25.0) 60,385 25.7 (25.2–26.2)
 Black, non-Hispanic 6,934 19.5 (18.8–20.3) 4,031 25.1 (23.6–26.6) 30,127 28.1 (27.6–28.6) 738 27.7 (24.0–31.7) 37,061 24.9 (24.5–25.3) 4,769 25.8 (24.4–27.3)
 Hispanic 5,536 14.3 (13.6–15.0) 2,057 21.9 (20.3–23.6) 17,350 22.7 (22.1–23.2) 245 28.8 (23.6–34.7) 22,886 18.9 (18.5–19.3) 2,302 22.7 (21.1–24.4)
 Other, non-Hispanic 6,002 16.2 (15.2–17.2) 3,602 28.4 (26.4–30.4) 14,791 23.0 (22.1–23.9) 414 33.5 (28.1–39.3) 20,793 20.2 (19.6–20.9) 4,016 29.1 (27.2–31.1)
Highest educational attainment §
 Less than high school 13,840 22.9 (22.3–23.6) 4,806 31.7 (28.5–35.0) 39,011 31.2 (30.7–31.8) 52,851 27.4 (27.0–27.9) 4,941 32.9 (29.4–36.6)
 High school or equivalent 31,252 20.7 (20.4–21.1) 21,041 25.0 (24.2–25.9) 110,453 27.8 (27.4–28.1) 1,163 30.1 (27.2–33.1) 141,705 25.0 (24.8–25.2) 22,204 25.3 (24.5–26.1)
 Technical degree/Some college 22,770 20.4 (20.0–20.9) 19,939 26.1 (25.3–26.8) 92,571 26.7 (26.4–27.0) 2,386 33.2 (31.0–35.5) 115,341 24.5 (24.3–24.7) 22,325 26.9 (26.2–27.7)
 College degree or higher 30,421 15.0 (14.7–15.3) 20,775 21.5 (20.7–22.3) 81,415 20.9 (20.7–21.2) 2,339 28.5 (26.7–30.3) 111,836 18.4 (18.3–18.6) 23,114 22.4 (21.7–23.2)
Employment status §
 Working 44,285 15.7 (15.4–16.0) 16,092 20.5 (19.9–21.0) 89,980 21.3 (21.1–21.6) 1,986 24.8 (22.7–27.0) 134,265 18.7 (18.5–18.9) 18,078 20.9 (20.3–21.4)
 Not working 6,261 19.3 (18.2–20.4) 2,209 27.3 (25.1–29.6) 14,569 27.7 (27.0–28.5) 326 35.6 (29.7–41.9) 20,830 24.2 (23.6–24.8) 2,535 28.2 (26.2–30.3)
 Homemaker/student 791 18.6 (15.7–21.8) 291 22.5 (18.6–26.9) 33,544 22.9 (22.4–23.3) 447 30.2 (26.6–33.9) 34,335 22.2 (21.8–22.6) 738 25.8 (23.2–28.6)
 Retired 31,111 33.4 (28.4–38.8) 41,535 37.3 (32.5–42.3) 136,637 33.5 (29.9–37.3) 167,748 34.3 (31.0–37.8) 43,801 38.8 (34.3–43.5)
 Unable to work 15,746 44.3 (42.9–45.8) 6,341 54.1 (50.5–57.8) 48,246 58.3 (57.2–59.4) 982 67.9 (60.6–74.5) 63,992 52.9 (52.0–53.7) 7,323 56.5 (53.2–59.8)
Annual household income §
 <$15,000 13,544 25.1 (24.4–25.8) 5,274 32.7 (30.4–35.1) 53,074 34.4 (33.9–35.0) 740 42.7 (37.9–47.6) 66,618 31.0 (30.5–31.4) 6,014 33.9 (31.8–36.0)
 $15,000 to <$25,000 16,443 22.5 (21.9–23.1) 11,629 30.5 (29.1–32.0) 65,049 30.0 (29.6–30.5) 1,071 35.9 (32.0–40.1) 81,492 27.1 (26.8–27.4) 12,700 31.1 (29.8–32.5)
 $25,000 to <$50,000 22,202 19.5 (19.0–19.9) 19,869 25.6 (24.7–26.5) 73,142 26.5 (26.1–26.8) 1,572 31.0 (28.6–33.6) 95,344 23.7 (23.4–24.0) 21,441 26.1 (25.2–26.9)
 ≥$50,000 36,178 17.1 (16.8–17.4) 22,271 22.3 (21.6–22.9) 74,785 21.9 (21.6–22.2) 1,874 28.0 (25.8–30.4) 110,963 19.8 (19.6–20.0) 24,145 22.9 (22.3–23.6)
Body mass index §
 Underweight/Normal weight (<25) 19,994 15.5 (15.1–15.8) 14,741 19.9 (19.1–20.7) 97,371 20.5 (20.3–20.7) 1,792 25.1 (23.0–27.3) 117,365 19.0 (18.8–19.2) 16,533 20.8 (20.1–21.6)
 Overweight (25 to <30) 39,025 18.0 (17.7–18.3) 28,729 23.0 (22.3–23.6) 95,942 25.6 (25.3–25.9) 1,863 31.6 (29.2–34.2) 134,967 22.0 (21.8–22.2) 30,592 23.6 (23.0–24.3)
 Obese (≥30) 38,114 26.0 (25.6–26.4) 22,537 32.4 (31.4–33.4) 109,627 35.5 (35.2–35.9) 2,039 39.9 (36.9–43.0) 147,741 31.5 (31.3–31.8) 24,576 33.0 (32.0–34.0)

Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval.

*

Age-standardized to 2000 U.S. projected population (age groups 18–44, 45–64, and ≥65 years); includes only those for whom age was reported.

Number of respondents (unweighted) who reported having arthritis.

§

Weighted to noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population using sampling weights provided in Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey data.

Estimates not presented if number of respondents was <50 or relative standard error was ≥30 because estimate might be unreliable.

Among the 50 states and DC, the median state-specific arthritis prevalence among veterans was 25.4% (range = 19.7% in DC to 32.7% in West Virginia) (Table 2, Figure). Among male veterans, the median state-specific prevalence was 24.7% (range = 18.4% in Hawaii to 32.7% in West Virginia); among women the median was 30.3% (range = 22.4% in Hawaii to 42.7% in Oregon) (Table 2). In each state, veterans comprised a substantial proportion of all persons with arthritis (median = 15.9%; range = 12.6% in Illinois and New Jersey to 22.2% in Alaska) (Table 2).

TABLE 2.

State-specific, age-standardized* estimated prevalence of arthritis among veterans, by sex — United States, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys (N = 1,464,060)

State Sex-specific All veterans Veterans with arthritis as % of all persons in state with arthritis

Men Women



No. No. (1,000s)§ %§ 95% CI§ No. No. (1,000s)§ %§ 95% CI§ No. No. (1,000s)§ %§ 95% CI§
Alabama 1,233 165 26.8 (24.4–29.2) 149 16 34.1 (28.7–39.9) 1,382 182 27.8 (25.7–30.0) 15.4
Alaska 612 24 26.6 (24.1–29.4) 65 2 26.4 (19.8–34.3) 677 26 26.6 (24.2–29.1) 22.2
Arizona 1,061 194 23.9 (21.1–27.0) 102 24 40.0 (29.7–51.2) 1,163 218 25.9 (22.9–29.2) 18.5
Arkansas 746 89 25.6 (22.5–29.0) 78 9 34.5 (26.3–43.7) 824 98 26.7 (23.8–29.8) 14.9
California 1,694 754 23.6 (21.7–25.5) 158 58 34.4 (28.9–40.4) 1,852 811 24.7 (22.9–26.6) 13.8
Colorado 1,941 141 24.7 (23.0–26.5) 176 14 31.1 (26.5–36.1) 2,117 155 25.4 (23.8–27.1) 17.7
Connecticut 905 87 24.9 (21.6–28.4) 66 5 27.6 (20.9–35.6) 971 92 25.0 (22.0–28.2) 14.1
Delaware 777 30 23.5 (20.5–26.7) 94 3 30.1 (23.4–37.7) 871 33 24.3 (21.6–27.2) 17.6
District of Columbia 420 10 19.9 (16.8–23.4) § § § § 468 10 19.7 (16.9–22.8) 10.3
Florida 3,276 639 23.8 (21.8–25.8) 313 60 34.4 (27.7–41.8) 3,589 699 25.0 (23.0–27.1) 17.5
Georgia 1,110 263 24.1 (22.0–26.3) 155 31 30.4 (25.5–35.7) 1,265 294 24.8 (22.9–26.9) 16.8
Hawaii 866 33 18.4 (16.5–20.5) 77 2 22.4 (17.6–28.2) 943 36 18.8 (17.0–20.7) 17.1
Idaho 891 50 28.9 (24.7–33.5) 76 3 30.1 (22.8–38.6) 967 53 28.7 (24.8–33.0) 18.7
Illinois 721 284 25.1 (21.4–29.3) 53 17 29.9 (22.0–39.3) 774 301 25.4 (22.0–29.1) 12.6
Indiana 1,182 171 27.3 (24.6–30.2) 90 10 31.0 (24.6–38.2) 1,272 181 27.3 (24.8–30.0) 13.3
Iowa 956 81 22.8 (20.3–25.4) 64 4 27.5 (19.4–37.4) 1,020 86 23.2 (20.8–25.9) 14.8
Kansas 2,497 80 26.2 (24.5–27.9) 223 7 33.8 (29.0–39.0) 2,720 87 26.9 (25.3–28.6) 17.2
Kentucky 1,417 134 30.2 (27.7–32.8) 133 7 29.3 (23.1–36.4) 1,550 141 30.2 (27.9–32.6) 12.9
Louisiana 1,018 117 23.4 (21.1–25.9) 88 9 31.1 (24.2–39.0) 1,106 126 24.4 (22.1–26.9) 13.7
Maine 1,678 52 28.7 (26.3–31.2) 125 3 28.1 (22.8–34.2) 1,803 55 28.5 (26.3–30.8) 17.5
Maryland 1,590 150 24.5 (22.2–27.1) 234 18 28.2 (24.2–32.6) 1,824 168 24.9 (22.8–27.1) 15.9
Massachusetts 2,159 159 23.6 (21.2–26.2) 188 12 33.1 (26.4–40.6) 2,347 171 24.9 (22.6–27.4) 13.9
Michigan 1,737 301 31.5 (28.3–34.8) 107 15 30.0 (23.5–37.5) 1,844 316 31.2 (28.3–34.2) 13.3
Minnesota 1,500 127 22.6 (20.0–25.5) 123 8 25.9 (19.5–33.5) 1,623 135 22.7 (20.2–25.4) 16.1
Mississippi 1,057 84 30.0 (26.9–33.4) 97 7 31.5 (25.2–38.5) 1,154 90 30.1 (27.2–33.1) 13.6
Missouri 1,058 190 28.4 (25.3–31.7) 86 13 33.5 (26.1–41.7) 1,144 203 28.7 (25.8–31.8) 15.3
Montana 1,585 37 26.4 (24.1–28.9) 127 3 32.0 (26.5–38.2) 1,712 40 26.9 (24.8–29.2) 19.0
Nebraska 2,946 53 25.7 (23.6–28.0) 212 4 39.5 (33.2–46.2) 3,158 57 26.8 (24.8–29.0) 17.0
Nevada 793 80 24.6 (21.2–28.2) 65 4 22.6 (17.1–29.2) 858 84 23.9 (20.9–27.1) 18.1
New Hampshire 1,077 44 28.1 (24.7–31.8) 92 3 29.2 (22.8–36.4) 1,169 48 27.8 (24.7–31.0) 17.3
New Jersey 1,524 179 21.6 (19.5–23.8) 120 10 23.8 (18.3–30.3) 1,644 190 22.0 (20.1–24.0) 12.6
New Mexico 1,225 56 23.9 (21.8–26.2) 131 5 28.1 (23.0–33.8) 1,356 61 24.2 (22.3–26.3) 16.1
New York 714 365 22.7 (20.0–25.8) 55 18 31.8 (24.4–40.1) 769 384 23.5 (20.8–26.3) 10.3
North Carolina 1,508 277 24.2 (22.3–26.2) 132 19 23.2 (18.9–28.1) 1,640 297 24.1 (22.4–25.9) 15.5
North Dakota 763 19 24.3 (21.8–27.0) 58 1 27.4 (20.6–35.4) 821 21 24.7 (22.3–27.3) 15.5
Ohio 1,566 351 26.7 (24.5–29.0) 115 20 30.9 (24.9–37.6) 1,681 372 27.2 (25.1–29.4) 14.2
Oklahoma 1,258 120 29.2 (26.6–31.9) 104 8 29.6 (24.5–35.3) 1,362 129 28.9 (26.7–31.3) 16.3
Oregon 864 120 27.6 (24.4–31.2) 93 12 42.7 (32.4–53.6) 957 133 29.1 (25.8–32.5) 16.1
Pennsylvania 2,014 384 28.4 (26.0–30.8) 159 24 35.0 (27.0–43.9) 2,173 409 29.1 (26.8–31.6) 14.1
Rhode Island 905 33 28.7 (25.3–32.5) 68 2 24.5 (18.4–31.9) 973 35 28.2 (25.0–31.6) 15.6
South Carolina 1,994 154 27.3 (25.2–29.6) 192 14 35.7 (30.5–41.2) 2,186 169 28.3 (26.3–30.3) 16.1
South Dakota 1,078 25 26.3 (22.7–30.2) 82 1 29.4 (22.8–36.9) 1,160 27 26.2 (22.9–29.7) 17.8
Tennessee 818 203 25.8 (22.2–29.7) 85 20 33.6 (24.3–44.4) 903 223 26.8 (23.4–30.4) 16.6
Texas 1,441 573 23.8 (21.7–26.0) 167 65 32.1 (25.4–39.6) 1,608 637 24.9 (22.9–27.0) 16.3
Utah 1,332 49 22.5 (20.5–24.5) 86 3 32.3 (25.4–40.0) 1,418 53 23.3 (21.4–25.3) 13.5
Vermont 891 19 24.4 (21.6–27.3) 61 1 32.8 (24.1–42.9) 952 20 25.4 (22.8–28.3) 14.8
Virginia 1,043 243 22.6 (20.7–24.6) 151 32 26.9 (22.9–31.3) 1,194 275 23.0 (21.2–24.8) 17.3
Washington 2,109 207 23.8 (22.0–25.6) 257 22 29.9 (25.4–34.8) 2,366 229 24.4 (22.8–26.1) 17.6
West Virginia 916 73 32.7 (29.8–35.8) 65 4 34.7 (27.6–42.6) 981 76 32.7 (30.0–35.6) 14.5
Wisconsin 742 154 22.0 (19.1–25.1) 55 10 28.5 (20.5–38.1) 797 164 22.4 (19.8–25.3) 14.8
Wyoming 1,054 18 24.7 (22.0–27.5) 85 1 28.1 (20.4–37.3) 1,139 20 25.0 (22.4–27.8) 18.3
Median 24.7 30.3 25.4 15.9
Guam 131 18.6 (15.3–22.3) ** ** ** 145 18.2 (15.2–21.6) 16.3
Puerto Rico 330 20.9 (18.0–24.1) ** ** ** 368 22.6 (19.1–26.5) 5.9
*

Age-standardized to 2000 U.S. projected population (age groups 18–44, 45–64, and ≥65 years); includes only those for whom age was reported.

Number of respondents (unweighted) who reported having arthritis.

§

Weighted to noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population using sampling weights provided in Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey data.

Number of veterans with arthritis/total number of adults in state with arthritis.

**

Estimates not presented if number of respondents was <50 or relative standard error was ≥30 because estimate might be unreliable.

FIGURE.

FIGURE

State-specific, age-standardized estimated prevalence of arthritis among veterans — United States, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys

Abbreviations: GU = Guam; PR = Puerto Rico.

Discussion

Veterans reported arthritis frequently and more often than nonveterans among both men and women and across all sociodemographic groups. Although a high level of physical fitness and good health are required for entry into military service, traumatic and overuse injuries are common during active duty (4). A recent study found that the incidence of osteoarthritis (a condition that represents the largest portion of arthritis cases and for which musculoskeletal injuries are a potent risk factor) was higher among an active duty sample than osteoarthritis incidence reported in civilian populations (5).

One of the few previous population-based studies of arthritis prevalence among veterans was a small study based on 2010 BRFSS data from men in five states (Indiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, and Wisconsin) (2). In that study, 44.8% (unadjusted) had arthritis, whereas in the current study, arthritis prevalence in these same five states was lower, ranging from 32.7% in West Virginia to 22.0% in Wisconsin. Two changes in the BRFSS methodology since 2011 might account for this difference. First, cell phone users are now sampled. Inclusion of cell phones captures younger adults who might be missed with previous landline-only data collection; the latter is more likely to capture age groups (middle aged and older adults) with a higher prevalence of arthritis. Second, sampling weights, which are applied to make estimates representative of each states’ population, are now calculated using iterative proportional fitting (raking) methods, whereas before 2011, sampling weights were derived using post-stratification procedures.§

Arthritis prevalence was consistently higher among female veterans than their male counterparts. A previously reported estimate among women using U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health system services indicated that three in four (77.6% in 2008) had arthritis (6). Although this estimate is considerably higher than the estimate for women overall in the current study (31.3%), VA health system consumers represent a subset of veterans who are more likely to have military service–associated disability (7). In the current study, arthritis prevalence among women veterans who reported being unable to work (67.9%) was almost as high as that in the previous study. This subgroup might be most similar to VA system users.

Although the prevalence of arthritis was higher among women, the relative differences in prevalence between veterans and nonveterans was higher for men than women. Patterns across age were also noteworthy. Arthritis was not only highly prevalent among middle aged (45–64 years) veterans (40.3% among women and 36.0% among men) but also among younger veterans (prevalences of 17.3% and 11.6% among women and men aged 18–44 years, respectively) indicating that arthritis and its effects need to be addressed among male and female veterans of all ages. Reducing the impact of arthritis among younger adults might help to stem its debilitating effects in later life.

The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, arthritis was based on self-report. Although recall bias is possible, a validation study among health plan enrollees found that this definition had a positive predictive value of 74.9% among persons aged 45–64 years and a 91.0% positive predictive value among persons ages ≥65 years (8) and is acceptable for public health surveillance of arthritis. Second, there was insufficient sample size to estimate state-specific arthritis prevalence across the same sociodemographic categories as for the overall estimates (Table 1). Nevertheless, BRFSS collection of veteran status in 2011, 2012, and 2013 allowed analysis of arthritis prevalence across finer sociodemographic categories than previously possible, which was especially important in calculating sex-specific estimates. Third, similar to civilian jobs, there is considerable heterogeneity in military occupations, ranging from sedentary office jobs to physically demanding roles, including combat. BRFSS did not collect information about duration of active duty and work-related risk factors for arthritis during service (e.g., trauma/injury versus physical work demand), and therefore arthritis prevalence across these groups cannot be determined. Fourth, data are cross-sectional and not longitudinal, and therefore, attributing onset of arthritis to veteran status is not appropriate; furthermore, arthritis among veterans might be unrelated to service and attributable instead to risk factors for arthritis (e.g., obesity for osteoarthritis or smoking for rheumatoid arthritis). Finally, results might be subject to selection bias because the median BRFSS response rates were <50% in all three survey years. Nevertheless, the population-based estimates for veterans overall and across sociodemographic categories in this study demonstrate that arthritis among veterans is an important public health concern.

What is already known on this topic?

Arthritis is a common chronic condition among veterans, and at least two population-based studies have reported a higher prevalence of arthritis among veterans compared with nonveterans. These arthritis prevalence studies of veterans were conducted before the Persian Gulf War, were small, or examined men only.

What is added by this report?

To assess the prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis among male and female veterans, CDC analyzed Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey data from 2011, 2012, and 2013. The analysis found that 25.6% of veterans reported having arthritis (25.0% among men and 31.3% among women) and that prevalence was higher among veterans than nonveterans across most sociodemographic categories. State-specific, age-standardized arthritis prevalence among veterans ranged from 18.8% in Hawaii to 32.7% in West Virginia.

What are the implications for public health practice?

The high prevalence of arthritis, combined with the large number of persons affected, indicate that strategies are needed to reduce the adverse effects of arthritis. Interventions to improve the quality of life of persons with arthritis include providing access to affordable physical activity and self-management education classes.

The contemporary, state-specific arthritis prevalence estimates provided in this report indicate that veterans with arthritis represented a sizeable portion (with a median of approximately one in six) of adults with arthritis in each state. Because most veterans use health systems other than the VA system (9), strategies for managing arthritis that are accessible to all veterans are essential. Fortunately, multiple self-management strategies have been proven to decrease the adverse effects of arthritis and improve the quality of life of persons with arthritis. These include courses that teach persons with arthritis how to achieve recommended levels of physical activity (e.g., Walk with Ease and EnhanceFitness) and those that teach skills for better managing arthritis and other chronic conditions, including diabetes, heart disease, and chronic lung diseases (e.g., self-management education classes such as the Chronic Disease Self-Management Program).** Although these courses are increasingly available in communities across the United States, even greater availability is needed to ensure they are readily available for the large and growing number of adults with arthritis, including veterans (10). General community offerings of these programs might not appeal to some veterans or accommodate their specific needs or preferences. The high prevalence of arthritis among veterans, coupled with the large absolute number of veterans affected, suggests that dedicated veterans’ service organizations in the community and other settings are well-positioned to offer these evidence-based programs to the veteran population. Additionally, health care professionals can have a meaningful impact on improving veterans’ quality of life and function by recommending these programs to their patients with arthritis.

Acknowledgment

Karen Wooten, MA, Division of Population Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC.

Footnotes

*

Additional information available at http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/annual_data.htm.

Additional information available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/statnt/statnt20.pdf.

§

Post-stratified weights are calculated by aligning each individual characteristic (e.g., sex and age) of the sample with the target population; iterative proportional fitting (raked weights) are calculated by iteratively aligning each specific combination of characteristics (e.g., women aged 18–25 years). Additional information available at http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/annual_data/2013/pdf/weighting_data.pdf.

**

Additional information available at http://www.cdc.gov/arthritis/interventions/self_manage.htm.

References

  • 1.Dominick KL, Golightly YM, Jackson GL. Arthritis prevalence and symptoms among US non-veterans, veterans, and veterans receiving Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare. J Rheumatol. 2006;33:348–54. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hoerster KD, Lehavot K, Simpson T, McFall M, Reiber G, Nelson KM. Health and health behavior differences: U.S. military, veteran, and civilian men. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43:483–9. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.07.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.CDC. Prevalence of doctor-diagnosed arthritis and arthritis-attributable activity limitation—United States, 2010–2012. MMWR. 2013;62:869–73. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hauret KG, Jones BH, Bullock SH, Canham-Chervak M, Canada S. Musculoskeletal injuries description of an under-recognized injury problem among military personnel. Am J Prev Med. 2010;38(1 Suppl):S61–70. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cameron KL, Hsiao MS, Owens BD, Burks R, Svoboda SJ. Incidence of physician-diagnosed osteoarthritis among active duty United States military service members. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63:2974–82. doi: 10.1002/art.30498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Yoon J, Scott JY, Phibbs CS, Frayne SM. Trends in rates and attributable costs of conditions among female VA patients, 2000 and 2008. Womens Health Issues. 2012;22:e337–44. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2012.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Friedman SA, Phibbs CS, Schmitt SK, Hayes PM, Herrera L, Frayne SM. New women veterans in the VHA: a longitudinal profile. Womens Health Issues. 2011;21(4 Suppl):S103–11. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2011.04.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sacks JJ, Harrold LR, Helmick CG, Gurwitz JH, Emani S, Yood RA. Validation of a surveillance case definition for arthritis. Journal Rheumatol. 2005;32:340–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Copeland LA, Zeber JE, Bingham MO, et al. Transition from military to VHA care: psychiatric health services for Iraq/Afghanistan combat-wounded. J Affect Disord. 2011;130:226–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.10.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ory MG, Smith ML, Patton K, Lorig K, Zenker W, Whitelaw N. Self-management at the tipping point: reaching 100,000 Americans with evidence-based programs. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013;61:821–3. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report are provided here courtesy of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

RESOURCES