Arkansas ranks low in 988 mental health hotline use
Arkansans are less likely to use the 988 national suicide prevention and mental health hotline than those in most states.
Why it matters: The service was launched nearly three years ago to help address America's mental health crisis — but gaps persist.
By the numbers: The hotline receives about 19.8 calls, texts and chats per 1,000 people in Arkansas, tying it for the 13th-lowest rate.
Yes, but: Arkansas had the 18th-highest rate of suicide in 2022, according to the CDC.
547 people in Arkansas died of suicide, a rate of 18 per 100,000 people.
Driving the news: Alaska (45.3 contacts per 1,000 people), Vermont (40.2) and New York (38.8) had the highest 988 contact rates among states in 2024, per new research published in JAMA Network Open.
Delaware (12.5), Alabama (14.4) and Florida (15.6) had the lowest.
The big picture: The 988 service fielded more than 16.3 million calls, texts and chats between July 2022 and the end of 2024.
The national contact rate was 48.9 per 1,000 people during that period, and 23.7 in 2024 alone.
How it works: "Contacts" include all calls, texts and chats sent to 988, including those forwarded along to more specific services, like the Veterans Crisis Line and the LGBTQ+ Line.
Geography for calls and chats was assigned based on users' phone numbers, while texts were assigned by ZIP codes shared during pre-chat surveys.
What they're saying: Several factors may be contributing to the state and regional differences in 988 use, says study author Jonathan Purtle, associate professor and director of policy research at New York University's School of Global Public Health.
That includes differences in how 988 is being advertised by states and cities, as well as political attitudes.
Many Americans remained unfamiliar with 988 as of last summer, per Ipsos polling.
And surveys have found that Democrats are more likely than Republicans to use 988, Purtle says: "We see this shake out in the map — in the South and more right-leaning places, we see lower volume."
Caveat: Less populous states have more variability due to their relatively smaller sample sizes, Purtle notes.
The latest: The Trump administration's proposed Health and Human Services budget would cut 988 services specifically tailored for LGBTQ+ youth, Axios' Avery Lotz reports.
What's next: Last year's nationwide 988 contact rate was less than half the rate of adult emergency room visits related to mental health, the analysis finds, despite ERs' cost and access issues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Health Line
33 minutes ago
- Health Line
Heart Arrhythmia After COVID-19 Vaccine: A Very Rare Side Effect
Arrhythmia is not a known side effect of COVID-19 vaccines. But ongoing monitoring has shown rare instances of heart complications in people who have received the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA vaccines. Arrhythmia affects the rate or rhythm at which the heart beats. Your heart might beat too fast (tachycardia), too slow (bradycardia), too early (premature contraction), or erratically (fibrillation). Arrhythmia can also be a sign of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle. Myocarditis is a very rare side effect of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. You're more likely to experience arrhythmia or myocarditis caused by COVID-19 itself than from the COVID-19 vaccine. At least 2 out of every 10 people hospitalized with COVID-19 experience heart problems, including damage to their heart muscle and arrhythmia. This is what scientists mean when they say the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks. Keep reading to learn more about heart arrhythmia and myocarditis following COVID-19 vaccination. What the research says Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that higher than normal cases of heart inflammation have been reported in the United States after COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines. These heart issues occurred mostly in males between ages 12 and 39 after they received the second dose of the vaccine, usually within a few days of receiving the vaccine. This side effect hasn't been observed in people who received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine or the Novavax protein subunit vaccine. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines. These vaccines contain genetically engineered mRNA that teaches your cells how to create antibodies capable of fighting the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Traditional vaccines, like the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine, contain genetic material from the virus, which also helps your body create antibodies. A 2021 analysis of CDC data found that people ages 12 to 39 who received their second COVID-19 mRNA vaccine had about a 13 in 1 million chance of experiencing heart inflammation. In other words, this side effect is exceedingly rare. Another 2021 study involved people ages 16 and up who were vaccinated against COVID-19. It also found slightly increased risks of heart inflammation after participants' first and second doses of COVID-19 vaccines in the first 28 days after vaccination. This research included the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine as well as the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines. This risk of myocarditis did appear to be a bit higher after a second dose of the Moderna vaccine — not the other vaccines studied — and was only observed in people younger than 40. Vaccination for people with preexisting heart conditions Even though arrhythmias are sometimes associated with myocarditis, no direct association was found between arrhythmia and COVID-19 vaccination. The American Heart Association recommends that anyone with heart disease get vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible. This is because they're at a much greater risk of heart-related complications from the coronavirus than they are from any COVID-19 vaccine. However, if you or your child has experienced myocarditis after a vaccine before, discuss your options with your doctor before getting vaccinated. What are the symptoms of heart arrhythmia? Arrhythmia doesn't always cause symptoms — that's why you'll sometimes hear it called 'asymptomatic.' But possible symptoms can include: chest pain shortness of breath feeling like the heart is fluttering or pounding (palpitations) rapid heartbeat slow or irregular heartbeat A 2021 study suggests that most people suspected to have myocarditis after COVID-19 experienced chest pain about 2 or 3 days after the second dose of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. Arrhythmia during COVID-19 Arrhythmias are more often seen after developing COVID-19 than after vaccination. In small studies conducted in Wuhan, China, during the initial outbreak of COVID-19, arrhythmias occurred at a rate of 16.7% of people hospitalized with COVID-19, with 44.4% of those who were hospitalized being treated in the intensive care unit (ICU). A retrospective 2021 study of 3,970 COVID-19 admissions at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City found that atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter (AF/AFL) happened in 10% of study participants. AF/AFL was also associated with a 46% higher risk of death — compared with 26% of study participants who had no arrhythmias. Viral infection is the most common cause of inflammation in the heart muscle in children. Children who develop myocarditis after COVID-19 also typically experience a more severe case than if it happens after a COVID-19 vaccination. Heart complications can occur even after you recover from COVID-19. Common vaccine side effects Heart problems are a very rare side effect of COVID-19 vaccines. More common side effects are mild and temporary, including: fever pain and soreness at injection site fatigue headache chills body aches These side effects occur as the vaccine triggers a response from your immune system. In other words, these side effects mean the vaccine is doing its job. Is the COVID-19 vaccine still effective? When first studied in earlier coronavirus variants, COVID-19 vaccines were shown to be roughly: 95% effective at preventing coronavirus infection 94% effective at preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among fully vaccinated adults Yet viruses constantly change. Several new variants have emerged since the novel coronavirus first appeared. But even though the first COVID-19 vaccines aren't as effective at preventing infection by the Delta or Omicron variants, they offer significant protection against these variants by reducing your risk of: severe illness hospitalization death Research published in 2022 estimates that COVID-19 vaccines are still up to 90% effective at preventing severe outcomes of COVID-19, including the need for invasive mechanical ventilation or death. People who are fully vaccinated and received a third booster had the highest level of protection against severe disease and hospitalization. Newer boosters have since been developed. Who should get a COVID-19 vaccine? Under the new administration, the CDC recommends that most people ages 18 years and older get an annual COVID-19 vaccine, while those 6 months to 17 years old and pregnant people make a personal decision with their loved ones. However, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends vaccination for every child 6 months or older, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends vaccination for all pregnant people.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
President Trump should ambrace stronger, smarter mental health parity
As someone in long-term recovery and an advocate for those battling addiction and mental health conditions, I've seen countless families shattered and lives lost because desperately needed care was out of reach. Often, the barrier isn't a lack of effective treatments, but how insurance coverage for the mind is treated as less important than for the body. This is why the current juncture regarding the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act is so critical, and why I urge President Trump to not just preserve but to boldly strengthen parity for all Americans. The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, a landmark 2008 bipartisan law, was meant to end this discrimination. It requires health insurance for mental health and substance use disorders be no more restrictive than for medical or surgical care. Yet, for millions, this promise remains elusive. Insurers adeptly use opaque 'non-quantitative treatment limitations' — like restrictive prior authorizations, unequal network adequacy and disparate reimbursement rates — to deny or limit care. In September 2024, a final rule from the previous administration aimed to close loopholes and enhance enforcement. However, after a January 2025 lawsuit, the Trump administration announced in May a pause on enforcing the 2024 rule. It is now reconsidering, modifying or even rescinding the final rule. While some see this pause as a setback, I see it as a pivotal moment — an opportunity for President Trump to champion mental health and addiction parity with unprecedented force, truly making America healthy again. This isn't about more burdensome regulation; it's about smarter, fairer rules that save lives and money. The Trump administration has laid groundwork for this. In his first term, Trump signed Executive Order 13877, 'Improving Price and Quality Transparency in American Healthcare to Put Patients First,' noting 'opaque pricing structures may benefit powerful special interest groups…but they generally leave patients and taxpayers worse off.' This led to the 2020 Transparency in Coverage Final Rule, forcing insurers to disclose actual pricing. More recently, the president's February 2025 Executive Order 14221, 'Making America Healthy Again by Empowering Patients with Clear, Accurate, and Actionable Healthcare Pricing Information,' doubled down, stating, 'For far too long, prices were hidden from patients and employers … [allowing] powerful entities … to operate with insufficient accountability,' This executive order directs agencies to crack down on evasive pricing and reinvigorate Transparency in Coverage Rule enforcement, mandating public disclosure of actual prices and standardized data. Here lies the powerful convergence: The president's drive for insurer transparency is key to unlocking true mental health parity. Discriminatory practices thrive in darkness. When insurers must bring their mental health provider reimbursement rates, network adequacy standards, and addiction treatment prior authorization approval rates into daylight — alongside medical/surgical data — disparities become undeniable and indefensible. As The Kennedy Forum recently stated, 'Strong parity implementation will support the Administration's goals to reduce wasteful spending, promote transparency and efficiency, and Make America Healthy Again. The Administration's actions to make health insurance data transparent and actionable can also advance parity, providing insights into provider access, service coverage, and reimbursement issues.' They noted this would 'continue President Trump's legacy from his first term, when he advanced parity implementation and signed into law the bipartisan statute building on parity.' This is President Trump's chance to go further than any administration. Instead of merely tweaking or reinstating the 2024 rule, he must direct the departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and Treasury to craft even stronger parity regulations. These new rules should explicitly integrate the robust transparency mandates from his executive orders. Imagine insurers compelled to publicly disclose complete non-quantitative treatment limitations analyses in a standardized format, showing how they apply limitations to mental health benefits compared to physical health benefits. This data must include clear metrics on network adequacy, directly comparing in-network mental health specialists to medical specialists, alongside detailed reimbursement rates. Furthermore, crucial data on claim denial rates, prior authorization timelines and out-of-network use for mental versus medical services must be readily accessible and regularly updated for public scrutiny. By leveraging the president's championed transparency, he can create a largely self-enforcing parity framework. Public exposure of discrimination will pressure insurers to comply with the law's spirit and letter, reducing future need for costly government enforcement. It empowers consumers, employers and researchers to hold insurers accountable. This approach is about fiscal responsibility and public health. Untreated mental illness cost our nation hundreds of billions annually (some estimates approach nearly $477.5 billion in 2024) in lost productivity, increased health care spending and criminal justice involvement. Ensuring access to care is an investment yielding healthier families, productive communities and a stronger nation. The pause on the 2024 Parity Final Rule, while concerning, can be a strategic reset — an opportunity for decisive leadership, making President Trump's transparency agenda the engine for true mental health parity. While agencies were tasked by EO 14221 to act by late May on transparency enforcement, the president's direct intervention now can ensure transparency and parity move forward together. President Trump has often spoken of tackling the overdose crisis and national health challenges. True mental health and addiction parity is central to that mission. It means a treatable brain illness faces no greater barriers than a treatable body illness. The president should build on his health care transparency legacy and deliver a transformative victory for millions. Trump must seize this moment to champion a new era of accountability. Ensure 'Make America Healthy Again' unequivocally includes the mind. The lives of countless Americans hang in the balance. Ryan Hampton is a national addiction recovery advocate and author of two bestselling books on the overdose crisis: 'American Fix' and 'Unsettled.' His latest book is 'Fentanyl Nation.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What you need to know before financing healthcare costs
Most Americans are putting off medical treatment due to expensive out-of-pocket health costs. Beto Casellas, CEO of Synchrony's Health & Wellness Platform, joins Wealth to discuss a new initiative aimed at helping consumers finance treatment through clearer, more transparent options. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Wealth here. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
