Psychiatric Services
Journal Home Search Current Issue Past Issues Subscribe All APPI Journals Help Contact Us
 
Psychiatr Serv 58:413-a-414, March 2007
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.58.3.413-a
© 2007 American Psychiatric Association
Quicksearch
Advanced Search
Or Search All APPI Journals
This Article
* Full Text (PDF)
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Zuvekas, S. H.
* Articles by Norquist, G.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* Articles by Zuvekas, S. H.
* Articles by Norquist, G.
Related Collections
* Costs, Cost Analysis
* Managed Care Programs
* Quality of Care, Practice Guidelines
* Education, Psychiatrists

Letter

In Reply: Dr. Kathol and Dr. Kishi raise an important, but fundamentally different, issue in asking whether the implementation of the MBHO in our case study led to an increase in total health care costs. Such an increase would clearly offset any gains from reductions in mental health treatment costs and would also imply poorer outcomes for patients with needs for mental health and substance abuse treatment. We more narrowly considered whether this particular MBHO shifted direct costs for such treatments—an important question in its own right. Several lines of evidence we presented in this and earlier publications suggest that this particular MBHO did not. Whether the implementation of the MBHO directly led to increases in other health care costs is a more difficult question to answer.

Others have tried to answer the question of whether increases in mental health and substance abuse treatment lead to corresponding decreases in other health care costs and vice versa. The idea of such a cost-offset effect is both seductive, for obvious reasons, and intuitive at some levels. Unfortunately, the evidence for it is much weaker than Kathol and Kishi imply. Although some studies do indeed show associations between mental health and other health care costs, these studies suffer from deep conceptual and empirical problems (1).

Kathol and Kishi also raise questions about our specific methods and findings regarding the narrower question of whether the MBHO shifted costs. The data set that we used is similar to almost all administrative and health claims data sets in that it did not allow us to identify who prescribed medications. The very fragmentation and lack of coordination of mental health and substance abuse treatment that concerns Kathol and Kishi—and us—also explains why there are so few studies of the cost-shifting behavior of MBHOs. We were quite fortunate to have access to all behavioral claims made under the MBHO, as well as to medical claims and to prescription drug claims from the third-party pharmacy benefit manager. In the absence of a direct link between prescriptions and prescribers, we view our test of whether there was an increase in use of psychotropic medications without concurrent use of specialty treatment as entirely reasonable.

We note that implementation of the MBHO took place during a period of rapid increases in prescribing by nonpsychiatrists and psychiatrists alike. In marked contrast to the MBHO experience in the study by Rosenheck and colleagues (2) that is cited by Kathol and Kishi, the number of people using outpatient specialty mental health and substance abuse treatment in our study also increased substantially with no change in treatment intensity (3).

Finally, Kathol and Kishi leap to much broader conclusions than we ourselves made. They state that we "suggested that the introduction of management practices via a managed behavioral health care organization (MBHO) does not shift 'treatment' costs" and that our "article gives the impression that carving out mental health and substance abuse treatment services from the rest of medical care is acceptable from a cost perspective." There is considerable variation in experience with MBHOs, and we described how the MBHO we studied might differ from others. We concluded that although in this case there was no evidence of cost-shifting, strong incentives remain for MBHOs to shift treatment costs.

Samuel H. Zuvekas, Ph.D., Agnes Rupp, Ph.D. and Grayson Norquist, M.D., M.S.P.H.


  References

 
 TOP
 References
 

  1. Sturm R: The myth of medical cost offset. Psychiatric Services 52:738–740,2001[Free Full Text]
  2. Rosenheck RA, Druss B, Stolar M, et al: Effect of declining mental health service use on employees of a large corporation. Health Affairs 18(5):193–203,1999
  3. Zuvekas SH, Regier DA, Rae DS, et al: The impacts of mental health parity and managed care in one large employer group. Health Affairs 21(3):148–159,2002




This Article
* Full Text (PDF)
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
* Articles by Zuvekas, S. H.
* Articles by Norquist, G.
* Search for Related Content
PubMed
* Articles by Zuvekas, S. H.
* Articles by Norquist, G.
Related Collections
* Costs, Cost Analysis
* Managed Care Programs
* Quality of Care, Practice Guidelines
* Education, Psychiatrists


Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2007 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