Harmonizing healthcare and other resource measures for evaluating economic costs in substance use disorder research.

BACKGROUND: Standardization and harmonization of healthcare resource utilization data can improve evaluations of the economic impact of treating people with substance use disorder (SUD), including reductions in use of expensive hospital and emergency department (ED) services, and can ensure consistency with current cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis guidelines. METHODS: We examined self-reported healthcare and other resource utilization data collected at baseline from three National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)-funded Seek, Test, Treat, and Retain intervention studies of individuals living with/at risk for HIV with SUD. Costs were calculated by multiplying mean healthcare resource utilization measures by monetary conversion factors reflecting cost per unit of care. We normalized baseline recall timeframes to past 30 days and evaluated for missing data. RESULTS: We identified measures that are feasible and appropriate for estimating healthcare sector costs including ED visits, inpatient hospital and residential facility stays, and outpatient encounters. We also identified two self-reported measures to inform societal costs (days experiencing SUD problems, participant spending on substances). Missingness was 8% or less for all study measures and was lower for single questions measuring utilization in a recall period. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend including measures representing units of service with specific recall periods (e.g., 6 months vs. lifetime), and collecting healthcare resource utilization data using single-question measures to reduce missingness.

Financing Early Psychosis Intervention Programs: Provider Organization Perspectives.

OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to identify prominent financing approaches for coordinated specialty care (CSC) of patients with first-episode psychosis, alignment or misalignment of such approaches with sustained CSC implementation, and CSC provider perspectives on ideal payment models. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with informants from CSC provider organizations. Purposeful sampling of CSC program directors, team leaders, and other administrators from a national e-mail Listserv was supplemented by snowball sampling via participant recommendations. Interview data from 19 CSC programs in 14 states were analyzed by using an integrated (inductive and deductive) approach to derive themes. RESULTS: The results indicated that financing approaches to CSC were patchwork and highly varied. Three major sources of funding were cited: insurance billing (largely fee for service [FFS] to Medicaid and private insurance), set-aside funding from the federal Mental Health Block Grant (MHBG) program, and state funding. The findings revealed limited coverage and restrictive rules associated with FFS insurance billing that were misaligned with CSC implementation. The grant nature of MHBG and other public funding was seen as a threat to long-term CSC sustainability and deployment. CSC stakeholders endorsed a bundled-payment approach by public and private payers and supported tying payment to client outcomes to reflect CSC's recovery orientation. CONCLUSIONS: Reliance on FFS insurance billing and public funding is likely to be unsustainable. Additionally, FFS billing is misaligned with CSC goals. Because of the diversity in CSC programs, populations, and existing funding mechanisms and rules, payer-provider collaboration will be essential in designing a bundled-payment model that meets local needs.

Design of a Payment Decision-Support Tool for Coordinated Specialty Care for Early Psychosis.

A strengthened evidence base and earmarked federal funding have spurred the implementation of coordinated specialty care (CSC) for people experiencing early psychosis. However, existing funding mechanisms are insufficient and unsustainable to support population-wide deployment of CSC. This article describes the design framework of an innovative payment model for CSC that includes a bundled case rate payment and an optional outcome-based payment. To assist CSC payer and provider organizations in designing payment systems tailored to local preferences and circumstances, the research team is developing a decision-support tool that allows users to define design choices and provide input. The authors document the analytical algorithms underlying the tool and discuss how it could be further developed or expanded for CSC and other behavioral health interventions that feature an interdisciplinary team of clinicians and nonclinical professionals, public education and outreach, patient centeredness, and a recovery orientation.