Behavioral Health Integration into Primary Care: a Microsimulation of Financial Implications for Practices.

BACKGROUND: New payments from Medicare encourage behavioral health services to be integrated into primary care practice activities. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the financial impact for primary care practices of integrating behavioral health services. DESIGN: Microsimulation model. PARTICIPANTS: We simulated patients and providers at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), non-FQHCs in urban and rural high-poverty areas, and practices outside of high-poverty areas surveyed by the National Association of Community Health Centers, National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and National Health Interview Survey. INTERVENTIONS: A collaborative care model (CoCM), involving telephone-based follow-up from a behaviorist care manager, or a primary care behaviorist model (PCBM), involving an in-clinic behaviorist. MAIN MEASURES: Net revenue change per full-time physician. KEY RESULTS: When behavioral health integration services were offered only to Medicare patients, net revenue was higher under CoCM (averaging $25,026 per MD in year 1 and $28,548/year in subsequent years) than PCBM (-$7052 in year 1 and -$3706/year in subsequent years). When behavioral health integration services were offered to all patients and were reimbursed by Medicare and private payers, only practices adopting the CoCM approach consistently gained net revenues. The outcomes of the model were sensitive to rates of patient referral acceptance, presentation, and therapy completion, but the CoCM approach remained consistently financially viable whereas PCBM would not be in the long-run across practice types. CONCLUSIONS: New Medicare payments may offer financial viability for primary care practices to integrate behavioral health services, but this viability depends on the approach toward care integration.

Behavioral health integration in primary care at Brigham and Women׳s Advanced Primary Care Associates, South Huntington.

Of the many problems facing the US healthcare system, the shortage of behavioral health providers in outpatient settings is particularly profound. To address this issue, Boston׳s Brigham and Women׳s Hospital identified ways to incorporate behavioral health into primary care when it opened the South Huntington Primary Care clinic in August 2011. When the needs of its patients were more complex than anticipated, the clinic created assessment tools and refined care processes to identify, triage, and monitor patients with mental illness. Key insights from the South Huntington experience include. • Hiring for roles instead of training can decrease costs of implementation. • A process for reflection, assessment, and adaptation is a critical component of innovation. • Innovations must adapt to the specific needs of the local community. • Innovations are most effective when they reflect the capabilities of local providers.

Two-year impact of the alternative quality contract on pediatric health care quality and spending.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the 2-year effect of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts' global budget arrangement, the Alternative Quality Contract (AQC), on pediatric quality and spending for children with special health care needs (CSHCN) and non-CSHCN. METHODS: Using a difference-in-differences approach, we compared quality and spending trends for 126,975 unique 0- to 21-year-olds receiving care from AQC groups with 415,331 propensity-matched patients receiving care from non-AQC groups; 23% of enrollees were CSHCN. We compared quality and spending pre (2006-2008) and post (2009-2010) AQC implementation, adjusting analyses for age, gender, health risk score, and secular trends. Pediatric outcome measures included 4 preventive and 2 acute care measures tied to pay-for-performance (P4P), 3 asthma and 2 attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder quality measures not tied to P4P, and average total annual medical spending. RESULTS: During the first 2 years of the AQC, pediatric care quality tied to P4P increased by +1.8% for CSHCN (P < .001) and +1.2% for non-CSHCN (P < .001) for AQC versus non-AQC groups; quality measures not tied to P4P showed no significant changes. Average total annual medical spending was ~5 times greater for CSHCN than non-CSHCN; there was no significant impact of the AQC on spending trends for children. CONCLUSIONS: During the first 2 years of the contract, the AQC had a small but significant positive effect on pediatric preventive care quality tied to P4P; this effect was greater for CSHCN than non-CSHCN. However, it did not significantly influence (positively or negatively) CSHCN measures not tied to P4P or affect per capita spending for either group.