PERSPECTIVE: Health Economic Interests at NIMH and NIDA to Improve Delivery of Behavioral Health Services.

BACKGROUND: Effective financing mechanisms are essential to ensuring that people can access and utilize effective treatments and services. Financing mechanisms are needed not only to pay for the delivery of those treatments and services, but also ancillary costs, while also keeping care affordable. AIMS: This article highlights key areas of the interest of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) in supporting applied health economics and health care financing research. Specifically, this article discusses the long-range impact of NIH's earlier investments in applied health economics research, and NIH's ongoing efforts to communicate its interests in health economics research. We discuss the 2023 NIMH-NIDA-sponsored health economics conference, and the ideas presented there for developing and assessing innovative behavioral health care financing models; three of the presented papers were recently published in the Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics. METHODS: We describe the history and impact of NIMH- and NIDA-sponsored economic research and identify current research interests as identified in the NIMH and NIDA Strategic Plans and recent funding announcements. We examine themes presented at the NIMH-NIDA Health Economics conference. The conference included over 300 participants from 20 countries, from six continents. RESULTS: The topics highlighted at the conference highlight the ways in which NIH-funded research has promoted the development of innovative health care financing methods, both from the supply side (e.g., providers and payers) and demand side (e.g., service users and families). Invited speakers discussed the findings from NIH-supported research in the topic areas of payment and financing, behavioral economics and social determinants of health. Keynote speakers highlighted emerging topics in the field, including the economics of health equity, biases in mental health models in health care, and value-based insurance design. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate a resurgence of and explicit interest in health economics and policy research at NIMH and NIDA. However, more work is needed in order to design funding mechanisms that fully provide access to and facilitate use of effective evidence-based practices to improve mental health outcomes. For example, it is important that policy and health economic research projects include decision makers who will be the end users of data and study results, to ensure that results can be meaningfully put into practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE: Designing effective and efficient funding mechanisms can help ensure that service users have access to effective treatments and that clinicians and provider organizations are adequately compensated for their work. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: Federal, state, and local policies, as well as policies of payers and health care organizations, can influence the type of care that is supported and incentivized. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: As demonstrated by the research interests as outlined in their respective Strategic Plans and funding announcements, NIMH and NIDA continue to fund health economic and policy research that aims to improve health care access, quality and outcomes for people with or at risk of developing behavioral health conditions in the US and around the world.

PERSPECTIVES: Insurance markets, labor markets, and the mental health services delivery system.

INTRODUCTION: The authors are health scientist administrators at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). The mission of NIMH is "to transform the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses through basic and clinical research, paving the way for prevention, recovery, and cure." As part of its portfolio, NIMH supports research on mental health economics, and mental health services research. METHOD: In this perspective article, the authors comment on two papers presented at the NIMH-sponsored Mental Health Services Research Conference in 2018 and subsequently published in the September 2019 issue of the Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics. Two important areas are highlighted in this review: (i) the impact of insurance and labor markets on the delivery of high-quality mental health services, and (ii) the need for advancements in method development and design in future studies. DISCUSSION: The complexity of health insurance markets created some unintended consequence of the mental health insurance parity legislation. Mental health provider shortages in local labor markets are a barrier to successful implementation and sustainment of innovative and evidence-based mental health service-delivery models for people with serious mental illness. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Data-capture techniques that seamlessly integrate insurance claims with clinical outcomes (e.g., from electronic health records) will better equip health economists and other end-users with rigorous research findings to inform public health policy and practice recommendations. Despite early signals of success, larger sample sizes and more rigorous research designs are needed to refine predictive models of functional outcomes of evidence-based service-delivery models (e.g., coordinated specialty care model including supported education, and supported employment) for people with first-episode psychosis.

Twelve-Month Health Care Use and Mortality in Commercially Insured Young People With Incident Psychosis in the United States.

Objective: To assess 12-month mortality and patterns of outpatient and inpatient treatment among young people experiencing an incident episode of psychosis in the United States. Method: Prospective observational analysis of a population-based cohort of commercially insured individuals aged 16-30 receiving a first observed (index) diagnosis of psychosis in 2008-2009. Data come from the US Department of Health and Human Services' Multi-Payer Claims Database Pilot. Outcomes are all-cause mortality identified via the Social Security Administration's full Death Master File; and inpatient, outpatient, and psychopharmacologic treatment based on health insurance claims data. Outcomes are assessed for the year after the index diagnosis. Results: Twelve-month mortality after the index psychosis diagnosis was 1968 per 100000 under our most conservative assumptions, some 24 times greater than in the general US population aged 16-30; and up to 7372 per 100000, some 89 times the corresponding general population rate. In the year after index, 61% of the cohort filled no antipsychotic prescriptions and 41% received no individual psychotherapy. Nearly two-thirds (62%) of the cohort had at least one hospitalization and/or one emergency department visit during the initial year of care. Conclusions: The hugely elevated mortality observed here underscores that young people experiencing psychosis warrant intensive clinical attention-yet we found low rates of pharmacotherapy and limited use of psychosocial treatment. These patterns reinforce the importance of providing coordinated, proactive treatment for young people with psychosis in US community settings.

Cost-Effectiveness of Comprehensive, Integrated Care for First Episode Psychosis in the NIMH RAISE Early Treatment Program.

This study compares the cost-effectiveness of Navigate (NAV), a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, team-based treatment approach for first episode psychosis (FEP) and usual Community Care (CC) in a cluster randomization trial. Patients at 34 community treatment clinics were randomly assigned to either NAV (N = 223) or CC (N = 181) for 2 years. Effectiveness was measured as a one standard deviation change on the Quality of Life Scale (QLS-SD). Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were evaluated with bootstrap distributions. The Net Health Benefits Approach was used to evaluate the probability that the value of NAV benefits exceeded its costs relative to CC from the perspective of the health care system. The NAV group improved significantly more on the QLS and had higher outpatient mental health and antipsychotic medication costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $12 081/QLS-SD, with a .94 probability that NAV was more cost-effective than CC at $40 000/QLS-SD. When converted to monetized Quality Adjusted Life Years, NAV benefits exceeded costs, especially at future generic drug prices.

Sharing State Mental Health Data for Research: Building Toward Ongoing Learning in Mental Health Care Systems.

With the rise of "big data," the opportunities to use administrative and clinical data to evaluate impact of state level program initiatives are greatly expanded. The National Institute of Mental Health has in recent years supported research studies pooling data across states to address state-relevant questions. This commentary summarizes these activities and describes future platforms that may enhance ongoing work in this area.

Individual and societal effects of mental disorders on earnings in the United States: results from the national comorbidity survey replication.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this report was to update previous estimates of the association between mental disorders and earnings. Current estimates for 2002 are based on data from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). METHOD: The NCS-R is a nationally representative survey of the U.S. household population that was administered from 2001 to 2003. Following the same basic approach as prior studies, with some modifications to improve model fitting, the authors predicted personal earnings in the 12 months before interview from information about 12-month and lifetime DSM-IV mental disorders among respondents ages 18-64, controlling for sociodemographic variables and substance use disorders. The authors used conventional demographic rate standardization methods to distinguish predictive effects of mental disorders on amount earned by persons with earnings from predictive effects on probability of having any earnings. RESULTS: A DSM-IV serious mental illness in the preceding 12 months significantly predicted reduced earnings. Other 12-month and lifetime DSM-IV/CIDI mental disorders did not. Respondents with serious mental illness had 12-month earnings averaging $16,306 less than other respondents with the same values for control variables ($26,435 among men, $9,302 among women), for a societal-level total of $193.2 billion. Of this total, 75.4% was due to reduced earnings among mentally ill persons with any earnings (79.6% men, 69.6% women). The remaining 24.6% was due to reduced probability of having any earnings. CONCLUSIONS: These results add to a growing body of evidence that mental disorders are associated with substantial societal-level impairments that should be taken into consideration when making decisions about the allocation of treatment and research resources.

Cost shifting under managed behavioral health care.

OBJECTIVE: The study examined whether a managed behavioral health care organization (MBHO) shifted treatment costs. METHODS: Four years of claims data (1991-1995) from an insurer that introduced an MBHO in 1992 to control treatment costs were analyzed. Although the MBHO was not at direct financial risk for specialty mental health treatment, it faced incentives related to reputation and contract renewal to shift costs to primary care treatment or prescription drugs. It was hypothesized that if cost shifting occurred, an increase would be noted in the use of psychotropic medications without concurrent use of specialty mental health treatment. Simple t tests and a generalized estimating equations probit specification were used to test this hypothesis. Separate tests were performed for use of any psychotropic medication, any newer antidepressant, and any stimulant in a large employer group that simultaneously implemented parity coverage (75,360 enrollees) and a group of smaller employers that did not (9,228 enrollees). RESULTS: The use of any psychotropic medication rose 64% in relative terms (p<.001) over the four-year period among enrollees of the large employer group and by 87% in the smaller groups (p<.001). In general, there were downward secular trends in the use of psychotropic medications without specialty care. Introduction of the MBHO was not significantly associated with the use of psychotropic medication alone. For newer antidepressants, introduction of the MBHO was associated in the large group with a 2.4 (p=.003) absolute percentage point decrease in medication use alone. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found to suggest that the MBHO shifted treatment costs.

The impacts of mental health parity and managed care in one large employer group: a reexamination.

Although the impacts of carve-outs to managed behavioral health care organizations (MBHOs) and parity mandates on costs are largely settled in the literature, their impacts on access are less clear. Here we reexamine a study published by Samuel Zuvekas and colleagues in this journal, which found that the number of people receiving mental health/substance abuse treatment increased by almost 50 percent after the introduction of mental health parity and an MBHO. Using multivariate panel data methods, we now suggest that secular trends were largely responsible for this increase.

Spillover effects of benefit expansions and carve-outs on psychotropic medication use and costs.

This paper extends the previous literature examining the impacts of managed behavioral health care carve-outs and mental health parity mandates on mental health and substance abuse (MH/SA) specialty treatment use and costs by considering the effects on psychotropic prescription medication costs. We use multivariate panel data methods to remove underlying secular growth trends, driven by increased demand for improved MH/SA treatment related to pharmaceutical innovations. We find that psychotropic medication costs continued to increase after the introduction of a substantial benefit expansion and carve-out to a managed behavioral health organization (MBHO), offsetting large declines in inpatient specialty MH/SA costs. However, we find evidence that the MBHO may have restrained growth in prescription medication spending.

The impacts of mental health parity and managed care in one large employer group.

We examine the impacts of a state mental health parity mandate on a large employer group, which simultaneously introduced a managed behavioral health care carve-out. Overall, we find that mental health/substance abuse (MH/SA) costs dropped 39 percent from the year prior to three years after parity, with managed care offsetting increases in demand induced by parity coverage. Managed care was most effective in reducing very high inpatient use among adolescents and children. The effect of the parity mandate on access was ambiguous: While treatment prevalence rose nearly 50 percent, similar increases were observed for groups not subject to the mandate.