Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care.

Financially supporting and sustaining behavioral health services integrated into primary care settings remains a major barrier to widespread implementation. Sustaining Healthcare Across Integrated Primary Care Efforts (SHAPE) was a demonstration project designed to prospectively examine the cost savings associated with utilizing an alternative payment methodology to support behavioral health services in primary care practices with integrated behavioral health services. Six primary care practices in Colorado participated in this project. Each practice had at least one on-site behavioral health clinician providing integrated behavioral health services. Three practices received non-fee-for-service payments (i.e., SHAPE payment) to support provision of behavioral health services for 18 months. Three practices did not receive the SHAPE payment and served as control practices for comparison purposes. Assignment to condition was nonrandom. Patient claims data were collected for 9 months before the start of the SHAPE demonstration project (pre-period) and for 18 months during the SHAPE project (post-period) to evaluate cost savings. During the 18-month post-period, analysis of the practices' claims data demonstrated that practices receiving the SHAPE payment generated approximately $1.08 million in net cost savings for their public payer population (i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, and Dual Eligible; N = 9,042). The cost savings were primarily achieved through reduction in downstream utilization (e.g., hospitalizations). The SHAPE demonstration project found that non-fee-for-service payments for behavioral health integrated into primary care may be associated with significant cost savings for public payers, which could have implications on future delivery and payment work in public programs (e.g., Medicaid).

Mental Health Conditions and Health Care Payments for Children with Chronic Medical Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate additional payments associated with co-existing mental health or substance use disorders (MH/SUDs) among commercially insured children and youth with chronic medical conditions (CMCs) and to determine whether children's MH/SUDs have similar associations with parental health care payments. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of a national database of paid commercial insurance claims for 2012-2013. Participants were children and youth ages 0 to 26 years covered as dependents on parents' health insurance and categorized by the presence or absence of any of 11 chronic medical conditions and MH/SUDs. We determined the numbers of children and youth with CMCs and paid health care claims categorized as hospital, professional, and pharmacy services and as medical or behavioral. We compared paid claims for children and youth with CMCs with and without co-occurring MH/SUDs and for their parents. RESULTS: The sample included almost 6.6 million children and youth and 5.8 million parents. Compared to children without CMCs, children with CMCs had higher costs, even higher for children with CMCs who also had MH/SUDs. Children with CMCs and co-occurring MH/SUDs had 2.4 times the annual payments of those with chronic conditions alone, especially for medical expenses. Estimated additional annual payments associated with MH/SUDs in children with CMCs were $8.8 billion. Parents of children with CMCs and associated MH/SUDs had payments 59% higher than those for parents of children with CMCs alone. CONCLUSIONS: MH/SUDs in children and youth with CMCs are associated with higher total health care payments for both patients and their parents, suggesting potential benefits from preventing or reducing the impact of MH/SUDs among children and youth with CMCs.

Payment reform in the patient-centered medical home: Enabling and sustaining integrated behavioral health care.

The patient-centered medical home (PCMH) is a promising framework for the redesign of primary care and more recently specialty care. As defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the PCMH framework has 5 attributes: comprehensive care, patient-centered care, coordinated care, accessible services, and quality and safety. Evidence increasingly demonstrates that for the PCMH to best achieve the Triple Aim (improved outcomes, decreased cost, and enhanced patient experience), treatment for behavioral health (including mental health, substance use, and life stressors) must be integrated as a central tenet. However, challenges to implementing the PCMH framework are compounded for real-world practitioners because payment reform rarely happens concurrently. Nowhere is this more evident than in attempts to integrate behavioral health clinicians into primary care. As behavioral health clinicians find opportunities to work in integrated settings, a comprehensive understanding of payment models is integral to the dialogue. This article describes alternatives to the traditional fee for service (FFS) model, including modified FFS, pay for performance, bundled payments, and global payments (i.e., capitation). We suggest that global payment structures provide the best fit to enable and sustain integrated behavioral health clinicians in ways that align with the Triple Aim. Finally, we present recommendations that offer specific, actionable steps to achieve payment reform, complement PCMH, and support integration efforts through policy. (PsycINFO Database Record

Recent Developments in Mental Health Parity.

Although the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) and associated regulations have been around for a while, behavioral health advocacy groups have expressed significant concern about a lack of enforcement to ensure compliance among health plans and employers. Federal and state governments have stepped up efforts to encourage MHPAEA compliance. This article presents recent developments in mental health parity, including a summary of the parity law requirements, new warning signs for nonquantitative treatment limitations, a confusing answer to a frequently asked question from the U.S. Department of Labor, an update on enforcement developments and the results of recent Milliman research on cost patterns since MHPAEA went into effect.

The role of behavioral health services in accountable care organizations.

Nationally, care delivery organizations are developing accountable care organizations (ACOs), but few have an appreciation of the importance of behavioral health services or knowledge about how to include them in an ACO since their funding and delivery are currently segregated from other medical services. This commentary reviews data on the impact of patients with concurrent medical and behavioral health conditions. They indicate that three-fourths of patients with behavioral health disorders are seen in the medical setting, but are largely untreated because few medical patients choose to access the behavioral health sector, which is where behavioral health providers are paid to work. Untreated behavioral health conditions in medical patients are associated with persistent medical illness and significantly increased total medical healthcare service use and cost, especially in those with chronic medical conditions. At a national level, those with behavioral health conditions use one-third of total healthcare resources. This will not change unless at-risk ACOs can effectively correct the mismatch between behavioral health patients and behavioral healthcare delivery. The authors suggest that ACO subcontracting for traditional segregated behavioral health services, whether from local provider groups or external vendors, will not achieve ACO-mandated access, treatment, and cost reduction goals. Rather, behavioral health specialists will need to become core ACO member providers. This will allow them to be deployed along with other member providers using value-added delivery approaches in the medical setting to integrate medical and behavioral health service delivery, and to achieve synergistic health and cost improvement.