Nonfatal Firearm Research Articles

Gun Victimization in the Line of Duty: Fatal and Non-Fatal Firearm Assaults on Police Officers in the United States, 2014-2019

Gun Victimization in the Line of Duty: Fatal and Non-Fatal Firearm Assaults on Police Officers in the United States, 2014-2019

Fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo: a hospital-based retrospective descriptive cohort study assessing correlates of adult mortality

IntroductionThe Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been the battleground for multiple armed conflicts, resulting in many fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries (F&NFFIs). Chronic insecurity has stressed the health system’s resources and created barriers to seeking, reaching, and receiving timely care further increasing the F&NFFI burden. Our institution is the largest trauma center in the region and receives the bulk of F&NFFI cases. We aimed to identify correlates of mortality in Congolese F&NFFI patients.MethodsWe included all F&NFFI patients admitted to our institution between 2017 and 2020. We extracted data from patient charts and admission logs. We identified mortality correlates using the two-sample t-test, Chi-square test, and multivariable regression analysis. A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsThis study included 814 adult patients, mostly male (86%) with an average age of 34.5 years and living 154.4 km away from the hospital on average. The most affected anatomical sites were the lower limbs (48.2%) and upper limbs (23.2%). The median length of stay was 34.0 days, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 3.6%. In addition, mortality was negatively correlated with diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.01), SaO2 (P < 0.001), and hemoglobin concentration (P = 0.002).ConclusionF&NFFIs cause an enormous burden in the region, and mortality is correlated with some clinical and biological variables. Thus, the study findings will inform F&NFFI referral, triage, and management in low-resource and mass casualty settings.

Increase in Mental Health Diagnoses Among Youth With Nonfatal Firearm Injuries.

Firearm injury is a leading cause of mortality for US youth. For every youth who dies from a firearm injury, at least 4 more survive. Little is known about the mental health consequences of non-fatal firearm injury in youth. Our objective was to quantify new mental health diagnoses after nonfatal firearm injury. MarketScan Medicaid and commercial data were used to identify youth age 0 to 17 years with an initial encounter for a nonfatal firearm injury in 2016 to 2017. The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes determined the presence of mental health conditions in the 12 months preinjury, during the index encounter, and in the 12 months postinjury. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with new mental health diagnoses during the 12 months postinjury. About 2178 patients (1769 Medicaid, 409 commercial) were identified for inclusion. 844 (38.8%) patients had a mental health diagnosis identified during the 12-month preinjury period. During the index encounter, 184 (8.5%) patients had a newly diagnosed mental health disorder. In the 12 months postinjury, 559 (25.7%) patients had a newly diagnosed mental health disorder. The most common new diagnosis categories were trauma disorders, substance abuse, and disruptive disorders. Medicaid insurance and a prior complex chronic condition were predictors of new mental health diagnosis. Over a quarter of youth with nonfatal firearm injury were diagnosed with a new mental health condition in the 12 months after their injury. Health care providers should be vigilant about mental health screening and ensuring access to mental health care services in this population.

Epidemiology of Upper Extremity Firearm Injuries among Major Trauma Hospitals in the United States.

As many as 34 percent of nonfatal firearm injuries involve the upper extremity. Although not lethal, these injuries cause substantial morbidity. The authors conducted an epidemiologic study characterizing upper extremity firearm-related injuries presenting to U.S. trauma centers over a 10-year period. The authors used the National Trauma Databank from 2007 to 2017 to identify isolated upper extremity firearm-related injuries. Descriptive statistics were performed to characterize patient demographic data, firearm type, extremity injury patterns, treatments received, hospital length of stay, and regional variation. The authors identified 48,254 upper extremity firearm-related injuries. The patients were largely male patients (85 percent), and over half were between the ages of 20 and 39 years. Handguns (34 percent) were the most frequently used firearm. Shoulder and upper arm were the most frequently injured areas (54 percent); however, 18 percent of patients injured two or more areas. Patients were most often treated at university hospitals (59 percent) with Level I or II trauma designation. Seventy percent were admitted and/or taken directly to the operating room. The mean hospital length of stay was 3 days. Payer mix among these patients was variable: Medicaid, 20 percent; private insurance, 20 percent; and self-pay, 29 percent. Upper-extremity firearm injuries are resource intensive, with three-quarters of patients requiring operative intervention and/or hospitalization. Level I and II trauma centers were the site of care for the majority of patients. Targeted gun policy reform and prevention measures directed toward at-risk groups have the potential to limit the unnecessary morbidity and costs associated with these injuries.

Retraction

Retraction: Pulcini, C.D., Goyal, M.K., Hall, M., Gruhler De Souza, H., Chaudhary, S., Alpern, E.R., Fein, J. and Fleegler, E.W. (2021), Nonfatal firearm injuries: Utilization and expenditures for children pre‐ and postinjury. Acad Emerg Med. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14252The above article from Academic Emergency Medicine, published online on 17 March 2021 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com), has been retracted by agreement between the journal's Editor‐in‐Chief, Jeffrey A. Kline, the authors, the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. After subsequent review with the authors, it was found that within the data reported, the article did not separate powder firearms from compressed air injuries, which is methodologically critical. It was further found that this distinction did not alter the conclusions reported. A corrected version of this article has been accepted for publication will publish shortly.

Nonfatal firearm injuries: Utilization and expenditures for children pre- and postinjury.

Firearm injuries are one of the leading preventable causes of morbidity and mortality among children. Limited information exists about the impact of nonfatal firearm injuries on utilization and expenditures. Our objective was to compare health care encounters and expenditures 1 year before and 1 year following a nonfatal firearm injury. This was a retrospective cohort study of children 0 to 18 years with ICD-9/ICD-10 diagnosis codes for firearm injury (excluding nonpowder) in the emergency department or inpatient setting from 2010 to 2016 in the Medicaid MarketScan claims database. Outcomes included: (1) difference in health care encounters for 1 year before and 1 year after injury, (2) difference in health care expenditures, and (3) difference in complex chronic disease status. Descriptive statistics characterized patient demographics and health care utilization. Health expenditures were evaluated with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Among 1,821 children, there were 22,398 health care encounters before the injury and 28,069 after. Concomitantly, there was an overall increase of $16.5 million in health expenditures ($9,084 per patient). There was a 50% increase in children qualifying for complex chronic condition status after firearm injury. Children who experience nonfatal firearm injury have increased number of health care encounters, chronic disease classification, and health care expenditures in the year following the injury. Prevention of firearm injuries in this vulnerable age group may result in considerable reductions in morbidity and health care costs.

What is the role of firearms in nonfatal intimate partner violence? Findings from civil protective order case data

BackgroundPerpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) use firearms to injure, scare, and manipulate their partners. Abusers who have a firearm in their homes are more likely to threaten and/or kill their partner. To date, however, limited research documents the nature of IPV perpetrator firearm access or the prevalence of nonfatal firearm abuse behaviors. MethodsFederal law restricts firearm access for IPV perpetrators in qualifying domestic violence protective order (DVPO) cases and information about firearms should be disclosed during the DVPO process. We used secondary data from civil DVPO cases (n = 406) in North Carolina that were collected using a representative sampling strategy. Data were from DVPO case files and structured DVPO hearing observations. We conducted a content analysis to record IPV perpetrator access to guns and reported firearm abuse behaviors. We used a linear regression analysis to determine whether IPV perpetrator gun access was associated with higher levels of reported abuse. We also examined factors associated with perpetration of nonfatal firearm abuse. ResultsWe found evidence of perpetrator firearm access in nearly half of all cases (46%, n = 108). Controlling for covariates, gun access was significantly associated with higher levels of reported IPV (b = 0.5, p < .001). Firearm abuse was reported in nearly one out of four cases (23.1%, n = 101), and often entailed spoken threats, displaying a gun, or holding a partner at gun point. The only factors associated with firearm abuse in the multivariate models were related to English language speaking/fluency. ConclusionsGun access should be considered an indicator for severe IPV. We must ensure that existing legal mechanisms to identify and restrict abuser access to firearms are fully implemented and enforced. Firearm abuse often manifests as non-physical coercive control which is traumatic and has the potential to escalate to homicide, even in the absence of past physical violence.

Firearm violence against children in the United States: Trends in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUNDThis study aimed to evaluate the patterns of firearm violence against children before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the patterns of specific types of firearm violence against children over time (2016–2020).METHODSRetrospective firearm violence data were obtained from the Gun Violence Archive. The rate of firearm violence was weighted per 100,000 children. A scatterplot was created to depict the rate of total annual child-involved shooting incidents over time; with a linear trendline fit to 2016 to 2019 data to show projected versus actual 2020 firearm violence. All 50 states were categorized into either “strong gun law” (n = 25) or “weak gun law” (n = 25) cohorts. Multivariate linear regressions were performed for number of child-involved shootings over time.RESULTSThere were a total of 1,076 child-involved shootings in 2020, 811 in 2019, and 803 in 2018. The median total child-involved shooting incidents per month per 100,000 children increased from 2018 to 2020 (0.095 vs. 0.124, p = 0.003) and from 2019 to 2020 (0.097 vs. 0.124, p = 0.010). Child killed by adult incidents also increased in 2020 compared with 2018 (p = 0.024) and 2019 (p = 0.049). The scatterplot demonstrates that total child-involved shootings in addition to both fatal and nonfatal firearm violence incidents exceeded the projected number of incidents extrapolated from 2016 to 2019 data. Multivariate linear regression demonstrated that, compared with weak gun law states, strong gun law states were associated with decreased monthly total child-involved shooting incidents between 2018 and 2020 (p < 0.001), as well as between 2019 and 2020 (p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONChild-involved shooting incidents increased significantly in 2020 surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. Given that gun law strength was associated with a decreased rate of monthly child-involved firearm violence, public health and legislative efforts should be made to protect this vulnerable population from exposure to firearms.LEVEL OF EVIDENCEEpidemiological, level III.

Non-fatal firearm injuries, Incidence and Circumstances: Presenting in DHQ Hospital Rawalpindi

Objective: To describe the incidence and manner of nonfatal firearm injuries in Rawalpindi District Study design: Observational retrospective study Place and Duration: District Head Quarters Hospital Rawalpindi. Duration of 6 months, from July 2020 to Dec 2020. Methodology: Total 82 patients with nonfatal firearm injuries were included. After approval from ERC committee of DHQ Hospital Rawalpindi, data was obtained from the duplicate copies of medicoleagal reports kept at the Forensic Medicine department t of IIMCT. These reports were carried out by cross ponding author and the demonstrators of Forensic Medicine department of IIMCT. The data was entered on a pre-designed Performa having variables such as demographics, time &amp; place of death, region of body involved, weapon used &amp; month of the year. Results: A total of 82 nonfatal firearm injuries were reported during these 6 months. 87% of the victims of were males encountering injuries 1 to 11 in number with an average of 3 injuries per person. 3o% of these injuries were received on the upper trunk, 32% on the lower trunk, 16% the lower limbs, 13% the upper limb, 3% the head and neck and 6% on the other regions. 68% of the injuries were lacerations, an exit wound was detected in 19% of cases and in 13% only entry wounds were found. Tattooing and burning of the adjacent skin were common in wounds on the upper and lower trunk while comminuted intra articular and shaft fractures were important varieties in the limbs. 86% of the victims were vitally stable, others being critically unstable with GCS ranging till 6/15. Conclusion: The public health issue of firearm-related injuries continues to be a concern. The necessity for a district-based, nationwide reporting system for fatal and nonfatal firearm-related injuries is critical. In Pakistan, these data could be used in the design, implementation, and assessment of preventative programs. Key words: Non fatal, Firearm injuries, Regional injuries

Recovery of Pediatric Patients After Firearm Injury: Can Health Systems Do More?

Firearm injuries are the second leading cause of death among youth in the United States. Nonfatal firearm injuries far outnumber fatalities, yet data detailing the recovery and post-injury needs of pediatric patients after hospital discharge are limited. This study evaluated health system support of pediatric patients after firearm injury, from acute hospitalization to outpatient follow-up. We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients <18years who presented to an urban level 1 trauma center between 2014 and 2019. Cases were categorized as accidental or intentional (stratified as assault-related or "crossfire" injuries). Outcomes included biopsychosocial assessment (BA) utilization, trauma psychology service consultation, and linkage to outpatient services. Among 115 patients, 94% were victims of community violence. Black (50%) and Latinx (44%) patients were disproportionately affected, as were males aged 15-16 years (71%). Overall mortality was 8%. Biopsychosocial assessment and trauma psychology consultations occurred in 43% and 20% of cases, respectively. Of eligible patients, 71% received referral to post-hospitalization support services. The most commonly identified needs were counseling, gang intervention, and help with the carceral system. Health systems should support long-term recovery of pediatric patients after firearm injury, particularly addressing social and structural determinants of health. Inpatient-to-outpatient linkages should be strengthened, and prospective follow-up is needed.

The impact of retained bullet fragments on outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds

BackgroundNationally, 115,000 non-fatal firearm injuries occurred in 2017, with many such victims possessing retained bullet fragments (RBFs); however, the impact of RBFs has not been well studied. MethodsAn institutional trauma database from an urban, level one trauma center was queried for patients presenting with gunshot wounds (GSWs) to the ED in 2017. GSWs were stratified by the presence or absence of RBFs. Groups were compared using t-tests, chi-squared, and logistic regression. ResultsOf 674 patients with GSWs who met inclusion criteria, 394 had RBFs versus 280 with no RBFs. Patients with RBFs were more likely admitted from the ED (57.4% vs. 41.8%, p < 0.001), had significantly higher rates of return to the ED within six months (30.7% vs. 18.6%, p < 0.001), and higher rates of subsequent GSW in the next year (5.1% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.03). On return to ED, 17.6% of those with a RBF had symptoms associated with their RBF. ConclusionRBFs may represent an unrecognized risk factor for both repeat ED visits and subsequent bullet injury.

Invited Commentary: Key Concepts of CT for Penetrating Abdominopelvic Injuries.

Invited Commentary: Key Concepts of CT for Penetrating Abdominopelvic Injuries.

Identifying nonfatal firearm assault incidents through linking police data and clinical records: Cohort study in Indianapolis, Indiana, 2007–2016

Nonfatal firearm assault incidents are more prevalent than gun homicides, however, little is understood about nonfatal firearm assault incidents due to a lack of accurate data in the United States. This is a descriptive study of all nonfatal firearm assault incidents identified through police and clinical records from 2007 to 2016 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Records were linked at the incident level to demonstrate the overlap and non-overlap of nonfatal firearm assault incidents in police and clinical records and describe differences in demographic characteristics of the victims. Incidents were matched within a 24-h time window of the recorded date of the police incident. Data were analyzed in fall 2020. There were 3797 nonfatal firearm assault incidents identified in police reports and 3131 clinical encounters with an ICD 9/10 diagnosis-based nonfatal firearm-related injury. 62% (n = 2366) of nonfatal firearm assault incidents matched within 24 h to a clinical encounter, 81% (n = 1905) had a firearm related ICD code: 40% (n = 947) were coded as a firearm-related assault, 32% (n = 754) were coded as a firearm-related accident; and 8.6% (n = 198) were coded as undetermined, self-inflicted or law enforcement firearm-related. The other 20% (n = 461) did not have an ICD firearm related diagnosis code. Results indicate most nonfatal firearm assault incidents overlap between police and clinical records systems, however, discrepancies between the systems exist. These findings also demonstrate an undercounting of nonfatal firearm assault incidents when relying on clinical data systems alone and more efforts are needed to link administrative police and clinical data in the study of nonfatal firearm assaults.

Nonfatal Firearm Injuries by Intent in the United States: 2016-2018 Hospital Discharge Records from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project.

IntroductionIn addition to the nearly 40,000 firearm deaths each year, nonfatal firearm injuries represent a significant public health burden to communities in the United States. We aimed to describe the incidence and rates of nonfatal firearm injuries.MethodsWe calculated nonfatal firearm injury estimates using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, including the Nationwide Emergency Department Samples and the National Inpatient Samples. We used the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification to identify firearm injury episodes. Deaths in the emergency department (ED) or as inpatients were excluded.ResultsIn addition to the 118,171 persons shot and killed by firearms from 2016–2018, 228,380 people were shot (ratio 1.9:1) and treated at a hospital ED or admitted to hospital, a rate of 23.4 nonfatal firearm injury episodes per 100,000 population. The number of nonfatal injury episodes varied by year: 2018 had the lowest at 69,692, compared to 84,776 in 2017 and 73,912 in 2016. Unintentional injury episodes were the most frequent, accounting for 58.5% (n = 81,217) and 38.9% (n = 34,820) of total nonfatal firearm hospital discharges from the ED and inpatients, respectively. Assault episodes were the next most frequent, at 36.3% (n = 50,482) of ED and 49.5% (n = 44,290) of inpatient discharges. The highest rate of nonfatal firearm injury by five-year age group was for 20- to 24-year-olds. With an annual rate of 73.53 per 100,000 population, the rates for ages 20–24 were more than 10 times higher than the rates for patients younger than 15 or 60 years and older. More than half (53.4%, n = 121,884) of hospital-treated, nonfatal firearm injury episodes were patients living in ZIP codes with a median household income in the lowest quartile, compared to 7.5% (n = 17,102) for patients residing in the highest income quartile ZIP codes, a sevenfold difference.ConclusionFor every person shot and killed by a gun in the US, two more are wounded. Unlike firearm deaths, which are predominantly suicides, most nonfatal firearm injury episodes are unintentional or with an assault intent. Having a reliable source of nonfatal injury data is essential to understanding the incidence of firearm injuries.

Retracted Nonfatal firearm injuries: Utilization and expenditures for children pre- and postinjury.

Firearm injuries are one of the leading preventable causes of morbidity and mortality among children. Limited information exists about the impact of nonfatal firearm injuries on utilization and expenditures. Our objective was to compare health care encounters and expenditures 1 year before and 1 year following a nonfatal firearm injury. This was a retrospective cohort study of children 0 to 18years with ICD-9/ICD-10 diagnosis codes for firearm injury in the emergency department or inpatient setting from 2010 to 2016 in the Medicaid MarketScan claims database. Outcomes included 1) difference in health care encounters for 1year before and 1year after injury, 2) difference in health care expenditures, and 3) difference in complex chronic disease status. Descriptive statistics characterized patient demographics and health care utilization. Health expenditures were evaluated with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Among 3,296 children, there were 47,660 health care encounters before the injury and 61,660 after. Concomitantly, there was an overall increase of $18.5 million in health expenditures ($5,612 per patient). There was a 40% increase in children qualifying for complex chronic condition status after firearm injury. Children who experience nonfatal firearm injury have increased number of health care encounters, chronic disease classification, and health care expenditures in the year following the injury. Prevention of firearm injuries in this vulnerable age group may result in considerable reductions in morbidity and health care costs.

Commentary: Reducing youth firearm violence and the associated health disparities requires enhanced surveillance and modern behavioral intervention strategies - a commentary on Bottiani et al. (2021).

Youth firearm injury is a worsening public health crisis, and the risks are not distributed evenly. Bottiani et al. skillfully explicated those health disparities, described sociological factors underlying them, and explored avenues for prevention. We supplement their analysis by detailing problems and solutions related to a critical barrier to firearm violence prevention - the nonexistence both of reliable 'gold standard' nonfatal firearm injury surveillance data, and systems for near real-time surveillance of firearm injuries at granular spatial scales that would enable to optimization of rapid response protocols and neighborhood-based prevention programs. We conclude with a discussion of modern, scalable, behavioral intervention approaches that could be leveraged to fill the largely absent evidence base resulting from the documented underfunding of youth firearm violence prevention research.

Mental Health Utilization and Expenditures for Children Pre–Post Firearm Injury

Mental Health Utilization and Expenditures for Children Pre–Post Firearm Injury

Neighborhood disadvantage and firearm injury: does shooting location matter?

BackgroundFirearm violence is a public health problem that disparately impacts areas of economic and social deprivation. Despite a growing literature on neighborhood characteristics and injury, few studies have examined the association between neighborhood disadvantage and fatal and nonfatal firearm assault using data on injury location. We conducted an ecological Bayesian spatial analysis examining neighborhood disadvantage as a social determinant of firearm injury in Seattle, Washington.MethodsNeighborhood disadvantage was measured using the National Neighborhood Data Archive disadvantage index. The index includes proportion of female-headed households with children, proportion of households with public assistance income, proportion of people with income below poverty in the past 12 months, and proportion of the civilian labor force aged 16 and older that are unemployed at the census tract level. Firearm injury counts included individuals with a documented assault-related gunshot wound identified from medical records and supplemented with the Gun Violence Archive between March 20, 2016 and December 31, 2018. Available addresses were geocoded to identify their point locations and then aggregated to the census tract level. Besag-York-Mollie (BYM2) Bayesian Poisson models were fit to the data to estimate the association between the index of neighborhood disadvantage and firearm injury count with a population offset within each census tract.ResultsNeighborhood disadvantage was significantly associated with the count of firearm injury in both non-spatial and spatial models. For two census tracts that differed by 1 decile of neighborhood disadvantage, the number of firearm injuries was higher by 21.0% (95% credible interval: 10.5, 32.8%) in the group with higher neighborhood disadvantage. After accounting for spatial structure, there was still considerable residual spatial dependence with 53.3% (95% credible interval: 17.0, 87.3%) of the model variance being spatial. Additionally, we observed census tracts with higher disadvantage and lower count of firearm injury in communities with proximity to employment opportunities and targeted redevelopment, suggesting other contextual protective factors.ConclusionsEven after adjusting for socioeconomic factors, firearm injury research should investigate spatial clustering as independence cannot be able to be assumed. Future research should continue to examine potential contextual and environmental neighborhood determinants that could impact firearm injuries in urban communities.

Nonfatal use of firearms in intimate partner violence: Results of a national survey

Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) and firearms has typically focused on homicide, so there is limited information on how firearms are used in nonfatal ways, particularly in community samples. We sought to estimate the prevalence of nonfatal firearm abuse in the context of IPV, understand how and against whom firearms are used, and examine consequences of this abuse. Using a national web-based survey of US adults who experienced IPV (n = 958), we asked respondents about experiences with nonfatal firearm abuse, including the frequency of firearm behaviors and consequences. Based on screening data weighted to be nationally representative, we estimated that 9.8% (95% CI: 9.0%, 10.6%) of US adults – or nearly 25 million – have experienced nonfatal firearm abuse by an intimate partner (i.e., were threatened with a firearm, had a firearm used on them, or were threatened by a partner who possessed or had easy access to a firearm). IPV victims who experienced nonfatal firearm abuse commonly reported experiencing other forms of IPV. The most common behaviors included the partner displaying a firearm (67.5%) and threatening to shoot the victim (63.0%). The majority (80.5%) of perpetrators were male, and 49.2% of respondents had a child at home at the time of abuse. The most common consequences of nonfatal firearm abuse were concerns for safety (86.2%) and feeling fearful (82.7%). Additionally, 43.1% of respondents reported physical injury, and 37.4% missed days of work or school. Practice and policy around firearm access for IPV perpetrators should attend to nonfatal firearm use against intimate partners.

Patterns and Trends of Gun Violence Against Women in the United States.

To examine patterns and trends of firearm injuries in a nationally representative sample of US women. Gun violence in the United States exceeds rates seen in most other industrialized countries. Due to the paucity of data little is known regarding demographics and temporal variations in firearm injuries among women. Data were extracted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (2001-2017) for women 18 years and older. Number of nonfatal firearm assaults and homicide per year were extracted and crude population-based injury rates were calculated. Sub-stratification by age-group and time period were performed. Between 2001 and 2017, there were 88,823 nonfatal firearm assaults involving women and 29,106 firearm homicides. There were 4116 victims of nonfatal firearm assault in 2001 (3.8 per 105) and 12,959 by 2017 (10.0 per 105). Homicide rates were 1.5 per 105 in 2001 and 1.7 per 105 in 2017. Sub-stratification by age-group and time period showed that there were no significant changes in nonfatal firearm assault rates between 2001 and 2010 (P-trend = 0.132 in 18-44 yo; 0.298 in 45-64 yo). However between 2011 and 2017, nonfatal assault rates increased from 7.10 per 105 to 19.24 per 105 in 18-44 yo (P-trend = 0.013) and from 1.48 per 105 to 3.93 per 105 in 45-64 yo (P-trend = 0.003). Similar trends were seen with firearm homicide among 18-44 yo (1.91 per 105 to 2.47 per 105 in 2011-2017, P-trend = 0.022). However, the trends among 45-64 yo were not significant in both time periods. Female victims of gun violence are increasing and more recent years have been marked with higher rates of firearm injuries, particularly among younger women. These data suggest that improved public health strategies and policies may be beneficial in reducing gun violence against US women.