Value Based Purchasing to Increase Tobacco Cessation Counseling and Medications in Behavioral Health Homes.

Increasing numbers of states are looking for ways to address behavioral health (BH) conditions among their residents. The first round of the State Innovation Models (SIM) Initiative provided financial and technical support to six states since 2013 to test the ability of state governments to lead health care system transformation. All six SIM states invested in integration of BH and primary care services. This study summarizes states' progress, challenges, and lessons learned on BH integration. Additionally, the study reports impacts on expenditure, utilization, and quality-of-care outcomes for persons with BH conditions across four SIM states. We use a mixed-methods design, drawing on focus groups and key informant interviews to reach conclusions on implementation and quantitative analysis using Medicaid claims data to assess impact. For three Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) models funded under SIM, we used a difference-in-differences regression model to compare outcomes for model participants with BH conditions and an in-state comparison group before-and-after model implementation. For the behavioral health home (BHH) model in Maine, we used a pre-post design to assess how outcomes for model participants changed over time. Informal relationship building, tailored technical assistance, and the promotion of data sharing were key factors in making progress. After three years of implementation, the growth in total expenditures was less than the comparison group by $128 (-$253, -$3; p < 0.10) and $62 (-$87, -$36; p < 0.001) per beneficiary per month for beneficiaries with BH conditions attributed to an ACO in Minnesota and Vermont, respectively. Likewise, there were reductions in emergency department use for ACO participants in all three states after two to four years of implementation. However, there was no improvement in BH-related quality metrics for ACO beneficiaries in all three states. Although participants in the BHH model had increased expenditures after two years of implementation, use of primary care and specialty care services increased by 3% and 8%, respectively, and antidepressant medication adherence also improved. The SIM Round 1 states made considerable progress in integrating BH and primary care services, and there were promising findings for all models. Taken together, there is some evidence that Medicaid payment models can improve patterns of care for beneficiaries with BH conditions.

Mitigating the Impact of Coronavirus Disease-2019 on Child and Family Behavioral Health: Suggested Policy Approaches

Research on Multiple Chronic Conditions

Health Differs by Foster Care Eligibility: A Nine-Year Retrospective Observational Study Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children

Utilization of Emergency Medical Transports and Hospital Admissions Among Persons With Behavioral Health Conditions

BackgroundBreastfeeding is a cornerstone of child health. We investigated the associations of any breastfeeding initiation and duration with physical, mental and behavioural health conditions among children aged 3–5 years in the USA.MethodsData were derived from the 2016 to 2022 National Survey of Children’s Health, which is a national, population-based, cross-sectional study. A total of 40 280 children aged 3–5 years were included. Any breastfeeding initiation and duration, physical (asthma, allergies, arthritis, cerebral palsy, diabetes, epilepsy or seizure disorder, heart conditions or severe headaches), mental (anxiety or depression) and behavioural (Tourette syndrome, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or behavioural/conduct problems) health conditions were measured using parent-reported questionnaires.ResultsAny breastfeeding was significantly associated with lower odds of behavioural health conditions (OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.58 to 0.99) and marginally with mental health conditions (OR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.02, p=0.067). There was a significant non-linear trend between any breastfeeding duration and having a mental or behavioural health condition (all Pnon-linear<0.001). The intervals of significant associations were 7.3–23.4 months for mental condition and 6.8–24.1 months for behavioural condition (the most associated points at 15.6 and 15.3 months). There were no significant associations of any breastfeeding initiation and duration with physical health.ConclusionsAny breastfeeding was linked to better behavioural health and marginally to mental health, with no association found for physical health among children aged 3–5 years in the USA. Any breastfeeding duration of approximately 15 months appears to have the strongest association with promoting children’s mental and behavioural health.

Children and youth face major gaps in access to mental and behavioral health services. Rates of identification of mental health conditions in the pediatric population continue to lag well behind what we know about the prevalence of these conditions. In addition, most children and youth with identified disorders do not get adequate treatment. Conservative figures place prevalence of diagnosable mental health conditions as at least 20% of the pediatric population, rising with older age. Increasing stress on families also leads to more needs for prevention and mental health promotion. And the separation between mental and physical health ignores much evidence of the substantially higher rates of mental and behavioral health conditions among children and youth with physical health conditions (2–3 times the rates found among pediatric patients without physical health conditions).1,2 Some access problems reflect major limitations in the mental health workforce (far too few child psychiatrists, psychologists, developmental-behavioral pediatricians, and other mental health professionals). Workforce limitations in turn reflect the weak financial base for children’s mental health services, providing relatively few incentives for young people to enter the children’s mental … Address correspondence to James M. Perrin, MD, MassGeneral Hospital for Children, 125 Nashua St, #860, Boston, MA 02114. E-mail: jperrin{at}mgh.harvard.edu

In the wake of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, more than 30 million previously uninsured Americans will gain access to health care. Some of these individuals may never have interfaced with the behavioral health system. In response to an increasing need for behavioral health services, improved outcomes, and cost containment, there is a growing shift from independent behavioral health and primary care practices to collaborative care practice models. These new models have psychiatrists working with primary care providers (PCPs) and behavioral health providers (BHPs, typically social workers or psychologists) using a systematic approach to concurrently treat behavioral health and physical health conditions. By following this approach it allows the extension of psychiatric expertise to more patients. From early studies in the 1990’s to improve the detection and treatment of depression in elderly patients in primary care settings, to more recent work on outcomes in the management of depression in patients with multiple chronic conditions, a vast body of research has demonstrated the benefit of collaborative care models. However, as with any new treatment modality, psychiatrists may approach collaborative care models with a degree of uncertainty about liability risks. While there are several documents as well as case law addressing the potential malpractice risk of consultation in other medical specialties, a review of the literature revealed few publications offering guidelines for psychiatric consultations. Previous publications have been limited in scope by focusing on interactions between psychiatrists with non-physician treatment providers and have not addressed the potential liability exposure in the overlapping roles of the psychiatrist within an integrated care setting. However, these authors likely could not have anticipated the change in scope of practice of psychiatry in recent years. This resource document provides background information on medical malpractice cases, defines the doctor-patient relationship, and distinguishes the different forms of “split treatment” and how this applies to psychiatric consultation offered to PCPs and BHPs in primary care settings. In addition, it describes the duty of the psychiatrist across the spectrum of roles on an integrated care team and makes recommendations to reduce the risk of medical malpractice issues. Close proximity can foster a culture of cooperation and mutual education between PCPs and psychiatrists. This approach, often referred to as “co-location,” has several benefits for patients. The PCP may or may not choose to communicate with the psychiatrist about the behavioral health of patients or make referrals, but the contiguity may increase the chances of successful referral. Limitations in this model have given rise to new treatment paradigms for improving care. In integrated care settings, behavioral health specialists are incorporated into the primary care practice with the psychiatrist providing consultation to the PCP and BHP for management of a patient’s behavioral health conditions. These recommendations may be based upon an informal or “curbside” consultation request by the PCP or BHP, a review of the medical record or registry, and, less frequently, by formal evaluation of the patient in person or by televideo. There are a number of integrated care models including the Improving Mood Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment (IMPACT) model and Massachusetts Child Psychiatry Access Project (MCPAP). In these models of care, the psychiatry consultant’s role may include key aspects of both formal and informal consultation and varying aspects of “split treatment” (including what have traditionally been referred to as supervisory, consultative or collaborative roles for non-physicians). This resource document provides a framework for some of the issues to consider when working in practices offering integrated care, and provides practical points to consider in managing liability concerns. Keep in mind that issues regarding liability may not always be clear, particularly in specialty areas that are rapidly evolving. Where indicated, the psychiatrist should clarify the extent of their involvement clinically and the level of interaction with the patient and care team. Whether there is liability for malpractice depends upon specific circumstances surrounding each case and each state has different laws, regulations and caselaw. Finally, consulting an attorney or risk manager for guidance on specific issues is strongly encouraged.

More than 280,000 Active Duty Service Members (ADSMs) sustained a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) between 2000 and 2019 (Q3). Previous studies of veterans have shown higher utilization of outpatient health clinics by veterans diagnosed with mTBI. Additionally, veterans with mTBI and comorbid behavioral health (BH) conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and substance use disorders have significantly higher health care utilization than veterans diagnosed with mTBI alone. However, few studies of the relationship between mTBI, health care utilization, and BH conditions in the active duty military population currently exist. We examined the proportion of ADSMs with a BH diagnosis before and after a first documented mTBI and quantified outpatient utilization of the Military Health System in the year before and following injury. Retrospective analysis of 4,901,840 outpatient encounters for 39,559 ADSMs with a first documented diagnosis of mTBI recorded in the Department of Defense electronic health record, subsets of who had a BH diagnosis. We examined median outpatient utilization 1 year before and 1 year after mTBI using Wilcoxon signed rank test, and the results are reported with an effect size r. Outpatient utilization is compared by BH subgroups. Approximately 60% of ADSMs experience a first mTBI with no associated BH condition, but 17% of men and women are newly diagnosed with a BH condition in the year following mTBI. ADSMs with a history of a BH condition before mTBI increased their median outpatient utilization from 23 to 35 visits for men and from 32 to 42 visits for women. In previously healthy ADSMs with a new BH condition following mTBI, men more than tripled median utilization from 7 to 24 outpatient visits, and women doubled utilization from 15 to 32 outpatient visits. Behavioral health comorbidities affect approximately one-third of ADSMs following a first mTBI, and approximately 17% of previously healthy active duty men and women will be diagnosed with a new BH condition in the year following a first mTBI. Post-mTBI outpatient health care utilization is highly dependent on the presence or absence of BH condition and is markedly higher is ADSMs with a BH diagnosis in the year after a first documented mTBI.

To determine whether racial and ethnic disparities in health care use differ for physical and behavioral health conditions. Secondary analysis of the 1996-1997 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Retrospective cohort study of children aged 2-18 years old who were members of participating households. Children were categorized as Hispanic, black, or white. Differences in caregiver-reported behavioral and physical health conditions and services use were compared, and estimates were weighted to reflect the complex sampling scheme. Of eligible children weighted to represent over 44 million in each year, 13-15 percent were Hispanic, 14 percent black, and 68-70 percent white. After adjusting for potential confounding, Hispanic and black children were less likely to report externalizing behavioral conditions than white children. Black but not Hispanic children were more likely than white children to report asthma. In addition, Hispanic and black children were less likely to report ambulatory visits, and black children were less likely to report receiving a prescription medication than white children. There were no differences in reported emergency room visits or hospitalizations. Interactions between race and various health conditions, health status, insurance, and income were not significant. In this nationally representative sample, we identified racial and ethnic disparities in the reporting of health conditions and the use of discretionary health services. Disparities differed between those with behavioral conditions and those with physical conditions. These disparities were not explained by traditional measures including the presence of health conditions, health status, insurance, and family income, and suggest that national surveys such as Medical Expenditure Panel Survey may benefit from the inclusion of additional explanatory measures.

BackgroundWomen with behavioral health (BH) conditions (e.g., mental illness and substance abuse) receive fewer cervical cancer (CC) screenings, are diagnosed at more advanced cancer stages, and are less likely to receive specialized treatments. The aim of this study was to identify barriers that healthcare providers face in providing CC screening to women with BH conditions.MethodsGuided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we conducted four focus groups in North Florida with 26 primary care and BH clinicians and staff to examine perceived barriers to CC screening among their patients with BH conditions to guide the future development of a tailored cervical cancer screening and follow-up intervention. Thematic analysis was used to analyze verbatim transcripts from audiotaped focus groups.ResultsThree main themes of barriers emerged from the data: 1) BH conditions related barriers included a history of trauma, stigma and discrimination, and uncontrolled comorbid conditions, 2) System level barriers related to lack of integration between BH and primary care, and 3) Similar barriers to the general population including lack of health insurance, insufficient processes to send out reminders, and challenges with communicating with patients.ConclusionsTailored CC screening interventions that address the unique needs of women with BH conditions are needed. Strategies that address improving trust between patients and healthcare providers, identifying avenues to improve receipt of screening during time-limited clinical visits, connecting BH and primary care providers, and addressing the social determinants of health have potential to improve CC screening rates for women with BH conditions.

A disproportionate share of Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) users have a behavioral health condition, but there exists limited research examining changes in behavioral health provision in FQHCs. The objectives of this study were to describe how the provision of behavioral health services by FQHCs to the population of people with behavioral health conditions has changed over time in the US, how these trends varied across states, and whether the proportion of total delivered services that are behavioral health services has changed within FQHCs over time. Descriptive analysis using the Uniform Data System and Global Burden of Disease Datasets from years 2012 to 2019. From 2012 to 2019, FQHC behavioral health visits per 1,000 population with any behavioral health condition grew 103%, with a 26-fold difference in average rates across states during the study period. Annual behavioral health visits per patient increased from 3.2 to 2012 to 3.4 in 2019. From 2012 to 2019, the number of behavioral health visits per 1,000 FQHC patients grew by 51%, whereas the rate of asthma visits declined by 14%, heart disease visits declined by 4%, and hypertension and diabetes related visits remained stable (changing < 1% for both). Behavioral health visit growth at FQHCs outpaced national prevalence of behavioral health conditions. This growth was driven by FQHCs serving an increasing number of patients with behavioral health conditions, without sacrificing the frequency of visits for individual patients with behavioral health conditions.

Mental and behavioral health conditions are common among children and adolescents in the United States. The purpose of this state-of the-art review article is to describe inequities in mental and behavioral health care access and outcomes for children and adolescents, characterize mechanisms behind the inequities, and discuss strategies to decrease them. Understanding the mechanisms underlying these inequities is essential to inform strategies to mitigate these health disparities. Half of United States children with a treatable mental health disorder do not receive treatment from a mental health professional. Children and adolescents in racial, ethnic, sexual, sex, and other minority groups experience inequities in access to care and disparities in outcomes for mental and behavioral health conditions. Suicide rates are nearly twice as high in Black compared to White boys 5 to 11 years old and have been increasing disproportionately among adolescent Black girls 12 to 17 years old. Children identifying as a sexual minority have >3 times increased odds of attempting suicide compared to heterosexual peers. Adverse experiences of children living as part of a minority group, including racism and discrimination, have immediate and lasting effects on mental health. Poverty and an uneven geographic distribution of resources also contribute to inequities in access and disparities in outcomes for mental and behavioral health conditions. Strategies to address inequities in mental and behavioral health among United States children include investing in a diverse workforce of mental health professionals, improving access to school-based services, ensuring equitable access to telehealth, and conducting quality improvement with rigorous attention to equity.

Pilot Program Zeroes in on SNF Mental, Behavioral Health Care

Individuals with behavioral health conditions (BHCs) smoke at high rates and have limited success with quitting, despite impressive gains in recent decades in reducing the overall prevalence of smoking in the United States. This study examined smoking disparities among individuals with BHCs within an integrated health care delivery system with convenient access to tobacco treatments. The sample consisted of patients in an integrated health care delivery system in 2010-a group (N=155,733) with one or more of the five most prevalent BHCs (depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, bipolar and related disorders, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder) and a group (N=155,733) without BHCs who were matched on age, sex, and medical home facility. The odds of smoking among patients with BHCs versus without BHCs were examined over four years using logistic regression generalized estimating equation models. Tobacco cessation medication utilization among a subset of smokers in 2010 was also examined. Although smoking prevalence decreased from 2010 to 2013 overall, the likelihood of smoking decreased significantly more slowly among patients with BHCs compared with patients without BHCs (p<.001), most notably among patients with substance use and bipolar and related disorders. Tobacco cessation medication use was low, and smokers with BHCs were more likely than smokers without BHCs to utilize these products (6.2% versus 3.6%, p<.001). Smoking decreased more slowly among individuals with BHCs compared with individuals without BHCs, even within an integrated health care system, highlighting the need to prioritize smoking cessation within specialty behavioral health treatment.