Psychiatric Services
Journal Home Search Current Issue Past Issues Subscribe All APPI Journals Help Contact Us
 
Psychiatr Serv 56:1245-1253, October 2005
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.56.10.1245
© 2005 American Psychiatric Association
Quicksearch
Advanced Search
Or Search All APPI Journals
This Article
* Full Text
* Full Text (PDF)
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
* Citation Map
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Similar articles in PubMed
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via HighWire
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Leff, H. S.
* Articles by Allen, I. E.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* PubMed Citation
* Articles by Leff, H. S.
* Articles by Allen, I. E.
Related Collections
* Chronically Mentally Ill Patients
* Health Insurance
* Access to Services
* Managed Care Programs
* Service Utilization
*Related Articles

Article

Assessment of Medicaid Managed Behavioral Health Care for Persons With Serious Mental Illness

H. Stephen Leff, Ph.D., Dow A. Wieman, Ph.D., Bentson H. McFarland, M.D., Ph.D., Joseph P. Morrissey, Ph.D., Aileen Rothbard, Sc.D., David L. Shern, Ph.D., A. Michael Wylie, Ph.D., Roger A. Boothroyd, Ph.D., T. Scott Stroup, M.D., M.P.H. and I. Elaine Allen, Ph.D.

OBJECTIVES: This five-site study compared Medicaid managed behavioral health programs and fee-for-service programs on use and quality of services, satisfaction, and symptoms and functioning of adults with serious mental illness. METHODS: Adults with serious mental illness in managed care programs (N=958) and fee-for-service programs (N=1,011) in five states were interviewed after the implementation of managed care and six months later. After a multiple regression to standardize the groups for case mix differences, a meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted, and bioequivalence methods were used to determine whether differences were significant for clinical or policy purposes. RESULTS: A significantly smaller proportion of the managed care group received inpatient care (5.7 percent compared with 11.5 percent). The managed care group received significantly more hours of primary care (4.9 compared with 4.5 hours) and was significantly less healthy. However, none of these differences exceed the bioequivalence criterion of 5 percent. Managed care and fee for service were "not different but not equivalent" on 20 of 34 dependent variables. Cochrane's Q statistic, which measured intersite consistency, was significant for 20 variables. CONCLUSIONS: Managed care and fee-for-service Medicaid programs did not differ on most measures; however, a lack of sufficient power was evident for many measures. Full endorsement of managed care for vulnerable populations will require further research that assumes low penetration rates and intersite variability.


Related Articles:

The Loss of Federal Support for Multisite Demonstrations
Steven S. Sharfstein
Psychiatr Serv 2005 56: 1185. [Full Text] [PDF]

October 2005: This Month's Highlights
Psychiatr Serv 2005 56: 1187. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Evid. Based Ment. HealthHome page
J C Markowitz
A letter from America: rescuing inpatient psychiatry
Evid. Based Ment. Health, August 1, 2008; 11(3): 68 - 69.
[Full Text] [PDF]




Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2005 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us

American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209-3901 * 800-368-5777 * appi at psych.org