Susan T Azrin | PubMed Health

PubMed2006

Behavioral health insurance parity for federal employees.

BACKGROUND: To improve insurance coverage of mental health and substance-abuse services, the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program offered mental health and substance-abuse benefits on a par with general medical benefits beginning in January 2001. The plans were encouraged to manage care. METHODS: We compared seven FEHB plans from 1999 through 2002 with a matched set of health plans that did not have benefits on a par with mental health and substance-abuse benefits (parity of mental health and substance-abuse benefits). Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we compared the claims patterns of matched pairs of FEHB and control plans by examining the rate of use, total spending, and out-of-pocket spending among users of mental health and substance-abuse services. RESULTS: The difference-in-differences analysis indicated that the observed increase in the rate of use of mental health and substance-abuse services after the implementation of the parity policy was due almost entirely to a general trend in increased use that was observed in comparison health plans as well as FEHB plans. The implementation of parity was associated with a statistically significant increase in use in one plan (+0.78 percent, P<0.05) a significant decrease in use in one plan (-0.96 percent, P<0.05), and no significant difference in use in the other five plans (range, -0.38 percent to +0.23 percent; P>0.05 for each comparison). For beneficiaries who used mental health and substance-abuse services, spending attributable to the implementation of parity decreased significantly for three plans (range, -201.99 dollars to -68.97 dollars; P<0.05 for each comparison) and did not change significantly for four plans (range, -42.13 dollars to +27.11 dollars; P>0.05 for each comparison). The implementation of parity was associated with significant reductions in out-of-pocket spending in five of seven plans. CONCLUSIONS: When coupled with management of care, implementation of parity in insurance benefits for behavioral health care can improve insurance protection without increasing total costs.

Cost Sharing↗

PubMed2003

Public policy and evidence-based practice.

The time has come to add to the body of EBP implementation knowledge at multiple levels, including knowledge about policy, program priorities, clinician practice, consumer adherence, and family member support. Implementation at the policy level, however, is primary and paramount. The national initiative supporting EBP implementation is one of the most important innovations on the mental health horizon. It will serve as the testing ground for what can be learned about bridging the gap between science and service. This important initiative will not go far if it is not supported by mental health policies--at state and federal levels--that create the organizational and financial incentives to implement EBPs. In addition, it will be a time-limited activity if it also does not yield lessons about how to adapt to new evidence and on-going systemic changes. Organizations must be flexible and able to learn and adapt. The promise of decades of research must be realized in practice. There is an opportunity to combine quality improvement with accountability through performance measurement and the implementation of effective new services and treatments. The Surgeon General simultaneously identified this research's promise and documented its shortcomings. His report outlines courses of action for policymakers that should guide clinicians away from service disparities and toward the implementation of EBP.

Age Factors↗