State-Level Estimates of Nonfatal Firearm Injury Hospitalizations, 2000-2021
ResearchPosted on rand.org May 19, 2025Published in: American Journal of Public Health (2025). DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2025.308069
ResearchPosted on rand.org May 19, 2025Published in: American Journal of Public Health (2025). DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2025.308069
To create a comprehensive, publicly available data set of state-level nonfatal firearm injury inpatient hospitalizations (NFIIHs) in the United States from 2000 to 2021.
We used Bayesian modeling to impute missing NFIIH rates for 334 state-year observations and correct for incomplete injury mechanism coding in 766 observations.
NFIIH rates increased nationally, with the largest rise between 2019 and 2020, up by one third to reach 1.31 (95% credibility interval [CrI] = 1.27, 1.35) per 10 000 population. State prevalences ranged from 0.18 (95% CrI = 0.14, 0.22) in Hawaii to 2.18 (2.04, 2.33) in Louisiana. South Central states (Mississippi, Arkansas, Missouri) had the largest increases. Twelve states—predominantly in the Northeast and West—experienced decreases. NFIIH rates correlated more strongly with firearm homicide rates (correlation = 0.86) than other intents (correlations < 0.28). Nationwide, there were 2.4 NFIIHs for every firearm homicide, but this ratio varied more than fourfold across states.
NFIIH rates varied substantially across and within states. Despite strong correlation, many states diverged from the national NFIIH to firearm homicide ratio. Public Health Implications: Firearm deaths systematically underrepresent serious firearm injuries in some states. This new data set can inform how policies affect serious firearm injuries and injury lethality.
This publication is part of the RAND external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.