Search

High-deductible health plans (HDHPs) are increasingly common in the U.S. health insurance market and are intended to reduce the use of low-value services, but evidence suggests that HDHP enrollees also reduce the use of high-value services. This study examined the effects of HDHPs on enrollees with mental health conditions, a population with high levels of unmet treatment need, often because of financial barriers. Enrollees with a co-occurring substance use disorder have greater treatment needs and unique barriers to care, perhaps changing their response to an HDHP.Commercial health insurance claims data in a difference-in-differences design was used to evaluate the effect of an employer's offer of an HDHP on 6,627,128 enrollee-years among enrollees with mental health conditions, stratified by having a co-occurring substance use disorder or not.Among enrollees without a co-occurring substance use disorder, an HDHP offer was associated with a 4.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]=2.4%-7.2%) reduction in overall spending on mental health care, despite an 11.3% (95% CI=1.0%-21.6%) increase in spending on mental health-related emergency department visits. Among enrollees with a co-occurring substance use disorder, no significant changes attributable to an HDHP offer were found in most categories of spending on combined mental health and substance use disorder care, apart from a 4.5% (95% CI=1.9%-7.2%) reduction in spending on psychotropic medications.HDHPs may reduce use of necessary care among enrollees with mental health conditions, which could exacerbate undertreatment in this population and result in adverse health outcomes.

Background. The messages used to communicate about harm reduction are critical in garnering public support for adoption of harm reduction interventions. Despite the demonstrated effectiveness of harm reduction interventions at reducing overdose deaths and disease transmission, the United States has been slow to adopt harm reduction to scale. Implementation of evidence-based interventions has been hindered by a historical framing of drug use as a moral failure and related stigmatizing attitudes among the public towards people who use drugs. Understanding how professional harm reduction advocates communicate to audiences about the benefits of harm reduction is a critical step to designing persuasive messaging strategies.Methods. We conducted qualitative interviews with a purposively recruited sample of U.S. professional harm reduction advocates (N = 15) to examine their perspectives on which types of messages are effective in persuading U.S. audiences on the value of harm reduction. Participants were professionals working in harm reduction advocacy at national- or state-level organizations promoting and/or implementing harm reduction. Semi-structured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a hybrid inductive/deductive approach.Results. Interviewees agreed that messages about the scientific evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of harm reduction approaches are important but insufficient, on their own, to persuade audiences. Interviewees identified two overarching messaging strategies they perceived as persuasive: using messages about harm reduction that align with audience-specific values, for example centering the value of life or individual redemption; and positioning harm reduction as part of the comprehensive solution to current issues audiences are facing related to drug use and overdose in their community. Interviewees discussed tailoring messages strategies to four key audiences: policymakers; law enforcement; religious groups; and the family and friends of people who use, or have used, drugs. For example, advocates discussed framing messages to law enforcement from the perspective of public safety.Conclusions. Interviewees viewed messages as most persuasive when they align with audience values and audience-specific concerns related to drug use and overdose death. Future research should test effectiveness of tailored messaging strategies to audiences using experimental approaches.

Objective: This study examined the association between enrollment in Maryland’s behavioral health home (BHH) program and use of outpatient mental health services among people with serious mental il...

Background Cancer is the second leading cause of death for people with serious mental illness (SMI), such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. People with SMI receive cancer screenings at lower rates than the general population. Aims We sought to identify factors associated with cancer screening in a publicly insured population with SMI and stratified by race, a factor itself linked with differential rates of cancer screening. Materials and methods We used Maryland Medicaid administrative claims data (2010-2018) to examine screening rates for cervical cancer (N = 40,622), breast cancer (N = 9818), colorectal cancer (N = 19,306), and prostate cancer (N = 4887) among eligible Black and white enrollees with SMI. We examined individual-level socio-demographic and clinical factors, including co-occurring substance use disorder, medical comorbidities, psychiatric diagnosis, obstetric-gynecologic and primary care utilization, as well as county-level characteristics, including metropolitan status, mean household income, and primary care workforce capacity. Generalized estimating equations with a logit link were used to examine the characteristics associated with cancer screening. Results Compared with white enrollees, Black enrollees were more likely to receive screening for cervical cancer (AOR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.15-1.22), breast cancer (AOR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.19-1.36), and colorectal cancer (AOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), while similar rates were observed for prostate cancer screening (AOR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.96-1.18). Primary care utilization and longer Medicaid enrollment were positively associated with cancer screening while co-occurring substance use disorder was negatively associated with cancer screening. Conclusion Improving cancer screening rates among populations with SMI should focus on facilitating continuous insurance coverage and access to primary care.

BACKGROUND: Long-term, continuous treatment with medication like buprenorphine is the gold standard for opioid use disorder (OUD). As high deductible health plans (HDHPs) become more prevalent in the commercial insurance market, they may pose financial barriers to people with OUD. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of HDHPs on continuity of buprenorphine treatment, concurrent visits for counseling/psychotherapy and OUD-related evaluation and management, and out-of-pocket spending. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis comparing trends in outcomes among enrollees whose employers offer an HDHP (treatment group) to enrollees whose employers never offer an HDHP (comparison group). PARTICIPANTS: Enrollees with OUD from a national sample of commercial health insurance plans during 2007–2017 who initiate buprenorphine treatment. MAIN MEASURES: Number of days of continuous buprenorphine treatment; probabilities of continuous buprenorphine treatment ≥30, ≥90, ≥180, and ≥365 days; probability of concurrent (i.e., within the same month) behavioral therapy (i.e., counseling or psychotherapy); probability of concurrent OUD-related evaluation and management visits; proportions of buprenorphine treatment episodes with counseling/psychotherapy and evaluation and management visits; and out-of-pocket (OOP) spending on buprenorphine, behavioral therapy, and evaluation and management visits. KEY RESULTS: HDHPs were associated with an average increase of $98 (95% CI: $48, $150) on OOP spending on buprenorphine per treatment episode but no change in the number of days of continuous buprenorphine treatment or concurrent use of related services. CONCLUSIONS: HDHPs do not reduce continuity of buprenorphine treatment among commercially insured enrollees with OUD but may increase financial burden for this population. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-021-07094-9.

Aims To identify implementation barriers and facilitators to the adoption and implementation of programs that provide opioid agonist treatments (OAT) with methadone and buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder in jails and prisons in the United States DESIGN: Qualitative analysis: semi-structured interviews were conducted, and thematic analyses of transcripts and notes were done using a hybrid inductive/deductive coding approach SETTING: Jails and prisons in the United States PARTICIPANTS: From August 2019 to January 2020, we conducted 20 key informant interviews with 35 individuals representing 19 carceral systems that both initiate and maintain OAT. Measurements Interviews covered four domains: (1) program adoption; (2) policy influence on implementation; (3) program structure; and (4) program outcomes. Findings Stigma among staff, particularly medical staff, challenged program adoption, but reduced over time as staff were exposed to the program. Regulations on OAT dispensation, such as licensing requirements and prescribing limits, were key challenges to program implementation and shaped program structure. Dispensing medication required significant staff, time and space. Facilities were further challenged to overcome stigma and concerns about diversion, as OAT medication is often treated as contraband in carceral settings. Some systems deviated from evidence-based treatment by limiting OAT dosage to low levels, requiring counseling for participation and requiring detoxification before medication initiation. Despite these challenges, early adopters felt strongly that other jails and prisons in the United States should provide OAT and that legislation and litigation may soon force OAT expansion in these carceral settings. Conclusions Despite identifying regulatory and logistical challenges, early adopters of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programs in US jails and prisons provide examples that demonstrate that OAT programs can successfully be implemented in carceral settings with tailoring to the specific context.

The United States faces an ongoing drug crisis, worsened by the undertreatment of substance use disorders (SUDs). Family enrollment in high deductible health plans (HDHPs) and the resulting increased cost exposure could exacerbate the undertreatment of SUD. This study characterized the distribution of health care spending within families where a member has a SUD and estimated the association between HDHPs and family health care spending.Using commercial claims and enrollment data from OptumLabs (2007-2017), we identified a treatment group of enrollees whose employers began offering an HDHP and comparison group whose employers never offered an HDHP. We used a difference-in-differences analysis that compared health care spending in families at firms that did vs. did not offer an HDHP before and after the HDHP offer. All models were adjusted for employer and year fixed effects, as well as family demographics, size, and chronic conditions.Our sample was comprised of 317,353 family-years. Family members with a SUD, on average, contributed an outsized proportion of total family health care expenditures (56.9% in a family of three). Offering a family HDHP was associated with a 6.1% reduction (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.7-2.6%) in the probability of families having any SUD-related expenditures. The HDHP offer was associated with a $1546 reduction in family total expenditures and a $1185 reduction for the individual with SUD (95% CI: -2272 to -821 and -1845 to -525, respectively).The increased prevalence of family enrollment in HDHPs may further the existing issue of undertreatment of SUDs.

Nineteen US states and D.C. have used the Affordable Care Act Medicaid health home waiver to create behavioral health home (BHH) programs for Medicaid beneficiaries with serious mental illness (SMI). BHH programs integrate physical healthcare management and coordination into specialty mental health programs. No studies have evaluated the effects of a BHH program created through the Affordable Care Act waiver on cardiovascular care quality among people with SMI. To study the effects of Maryland’s Medicaid health home waiver BHH program, implemented October 1, 2013, on quality of cardiovascular care among individuals with SMI. Retrospective cohort analysis using Maryland Medicaid administrative claims data from July 1, 2010, to September 30, 2016. We used marginal structural modeling with inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for censoring and potential time-dependent confounding. Maryland Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes or cardiovascular disease (CVD) participating in psychiatric rehabilitation programs, the setting in which BHHs were implemented. To qualify for psychiatric rehabilitation programs, individuals must have SMI. The analytic sample included BHH and non-BHH participants, N = 2605 with diabetes and N = 1899 with CVD. Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures of cardiovascular care quality including annual receipt of diabetic eye and foot exams; HbA1c, diabetic nephropathy, and cholesterol testing; and statin therapy receipt and adherence among individuals with diabetes, as well as HEDIS measures of annual receipt of cholesterol testing and statin therapy and adherence among individuals with CVD. Relative to non-enrollment, enrollment in Maryland’s BHH program was associated with increased likelihood of eye exam receipt among individuals with SMI and co-morbid diabetes, but no changes in other care quality measures. Additional financing, infrastructure, and implementation supports may be needed to realize the full potential of Maryland’s BHH to improve cardiovascular care for people with SMI.

Gun-related deaths are on the rise in the US, and following recent mass shootings, gun policy has emerged as an issue in the 2020 election cycle. Political advertising is an increasingly important ...

OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits occur more frequently for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). One mechanism that may reduce the likelihood of these events is the utilization of home and community-based care. Using rich commercial claims data and a rigorous analytical framework, this study examines whether spending on outpatient services for ASD, including occupational, physical, and speech therapies and other behavioral interventions, reduces the likelihood of psychiatric hospitalizations and ED visits. METHODS: The study sample comprised over 100,000 children with ASD and commercial insurance in 50 states between 2008 and 2012. The authors estimated maximum-likelihood complementary log-log link survival models with robust standard errors. The outcomes of interest were a hospitalization or an ED visit with an associated psychiatric diagnosis code (ICD-9-CM 290 through 319) in a given week. RESULTS: A $125 increase in weekly spending on ASD-specific outpatient services 7 to 14 weeks prior to a given week reduced the likelihood of a psychiatric hospitalization by 2% in that week. ASD-specific outpatient spending during the 6 weeks prior to a psychiatric hospitalization did not decrease its risk. Spending on ASD-specific outpatient services did not reduce the likelihood of a psychiatric ED visit. CONCLUSIONS: The financial burden associated with ASD is extensive and psychiatric hospitalizations remain the most expensive type of care, costing over $4,000 per week on average. Identifying the mechanisms by which psychiatric hospitalizations occur can reduce the likelihood of these events.

Behavioral health homes, shown to improve receipt of evidence-based medical services among people with serious mental illness in randomized clinical trials, have had limited results in real-world settings; nonetheless, these programs are spreading rapidly. To date, no studies have considered what set of policies is needed to support effective implementation of these programs. As a first step toward identifying an optimal set of policies to support behavioral health home implementation, we use the policy ecology framework to map the policies surrounding Maryland’s Medicaid behavioral health home program. Results suggest that existing policies fail to address important implementation barriers.

Safe consumption sites enable use of preobtained drugs in hygienic settings where trained staff are available to respond to overdoses and connect individuals with health and social services. This study examined efforts to advance policies to establish safe consumption sites in the United States, where no sanctioned sites exist.Between April and July 2018, the authors conducted 25 telephone interviews with a purposive sample of key informants in five communities considering safe consumption site implementation. Participants included organizers and advocates, government officials, and personnel with social service and health organizations. Interview notes were analyzed by using hybrid inductive-deductive coding.Key strategies for organizing support for safe consumption sites included involving people who use drugs, engaging diverse partners, supporting allies in related causes, and using various tactics to garner support from policy makers. Major barriers to adoption included identifying the right locations, uncertainty about the federal response, mistrust arising from racial injustice in drug policy, and financing. Participants identified facilitators of progress toward safe consumption site adoption, such as building on existing harm reduction programs, securing political champions, and exposing community officials to programs operating internationally.A window of opportunity may be opening to advance policy related to safe consumption sites; whether sanctioned sites become part of the broader policy strategy for addressing drug use and overdose in the United States will depend on the experiences of the first sites. Organizing around this issue may facilitate engagement among people who use drugs in broader conversations about drug policy.

Context: Understanding the role of drug-related issues in political campaign advertising can provide insight on the salience of this issue and the priorities of candidates for elected office. This study sought to quantify the share of campaign advertising mentioning drugs in the 2012 and 2016 election cycles and to estimate the association between local drug overdose mortality and drug mentions in campaign advertising across US media markets. Methods: The analysis used descriptive and spatial statistics to examine geographic variation in campaign advertising mentions of drugs across all 210 US media markets, and it used multivariable regression to assess area-level factors associated with that variation. Findings: The share of campaign ads mentioning drugs grew from 0.5% in the 2012 election cycle to 1.6% in the 2016 cycle. In the 2016 cycle, ads airing in media markets with overdose mortality rates in the 95th percentile were more than three times as likely to mention drugs as ads airing in areas with overdose mortality rates in the 5th percentile. Conclusions: A small proportion of campaign advertising mentioned drug-related issues. In the 2016 cycle, the issue was more prominent in advertising in areas hardest hit by the drug overdose crisis and in advertising for local races.

Objective To evaluate the impact of Maryland's behavioral health homes (BHHs) on receipt of follow-up care and readmissions following hospitalization among Medicaid enrollees with serious mental illness (SMI). Data sources Maryland Medicaid administrative claims for 12 232 individuals. Study design Weighted marginal structural models were estimated to account for time-varying exposure to BHH enrollment and time-varying confounders. These models compared changes over time in outcomes among BHH and comparison participants. Outcome measures included readmissions and follow-up care within 7 and 30 days following hospitalization. Data collection/extraction methods Eligibility criteria included continuous enrollment in Medicaid for the first two years of the study period; 21-64 years; and use of psychiatric rehabilitation services. Principal findings Over three years, BHH enrollment was associated with 3.8 percentage point (95% CI: 1.5, 6.1) increased probability of having a mental health follow-up service within 7 days of discharge from a mental illness-related hospitalization and 1.9 percentage point (95% CI: 0.0, 3.9) increased probability of having a general medical follow-up within 7 days of discharge from a somatic hospitalization. BHHs had no effect on probability of readmission. Conclusions BHHs may improve follow-up care for Medicaid enrollees with SMI, but effects do not translate into reduced risk of readmission.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has affected opioid agonist treatment (OAT) programs in jails and prisons. METHODS: In May 2020, we conducted an online survey of 19 carceral systems that provided methadone and/or buprenorphine treatment for incarcerated populations before COVID-19. Eleven survey items examined challenges and changes to these programs as a result of the pandemic. Sixteen of 19 programs (84%) responded to the survey. RESULTS: Ten out of 16 systems reported downsizing their OAT programs. Seven of 16 systems made changes to medication dispensation processes. Half of systems report challenges implementing physical distancing (n = 8), and/or obtaining personal protective equipment (n = 8). In 13 out of 16 systems some OAT program participants were released early due to COVID-19 infection risk. CONCLUSIONS: Jails and prisons with existing OAT programs have curtailed their operations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the robust evidence base around OAT for treating opioid use disorder and averting overdose deaths, guidance is needed on maintaining and ramping up medication access as carceral facilities grapple with implementing COVID-19 mitigation.

Background Most people with opioid use disorder (OUD) are not treated with FDA-approved medications methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone. Expanding capacity for evidence-based OUD medication in primary care is a national priority. No studies have examined primary care trainee physicians’ attitudes about these medications. This study surveyed a national sample of primary care trainee physicians and compared their views with those of primary care attending physicians (i.e., those who have completed training). Methods Random samples of 1,000 trainee physicians and 1,000 attending physicians specializing in family, internal, or general medicine were selected from the American Medical Association Masterfile. Surveys were mailed February-August 2019. 45 % of eligible trainee physicians and 54 % of eligible attending physicians responded. Chi-square tests were used to compare responses between the groups. Results Trainee physicians were more likely than attending physicians to agree that treating OUD with medication is more effective than treatment without medication (76 % versus 67 %, p = 0.03). Half of trainee physicians (51 %) expressed interest in treating patients with OUD compared to 20 % of attending physicians. Trainee physicians expressed greater support than attending physicians for policies that loosen restrictions on prescribing OUD medications. Conclusions Relative to attending physicians, the emerging cohort of primary care physicians may be more receptive to working with patients with OUD and prescribing medication. Enhancing medical training on OUD and its treatment, exposing clinicians to individuals in recovery from OUD, and increasing support for clinicians that provide medication treatment for OUD may strengthen this group’s capacity to respond to the opioid crisis.

Introduction This study aims to quantify out-of-pocket spending associated with respiratory hospitalizations for conditions similar to those caused by coronavirus disease 2019 and to compare out-of-pocket spending differences among those enrolled in consumer-directed health plans and in traditional, low-deductible plans. Methods This study used deidentified administrative claims from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (January 1, 2016–August 31, 2019) to identify patients with a respiratory hospitalization. It compared unadjusted out-of-pocket spending among consumer-directed health plan enrollees with that among traditional plan enrollees using difference of mean significance tests and repeated the analysis separately by age category and calendar year quarter. These data were collected on a rolling basis by OptumLabs and were analyzed in March 2020. Results Commercially insured consumer-directed health plan enrollees had significantly higher out-of-pocket spending than traditional plan enrollees, and these differences were largest among younger populations. The largest difference in out-of-pocket spending occurred during the first half of the year. Conclusions Consumer-directed health plan enrollees may experience differential financial burden from a hospitalization related to coronavirus disease 2019. Although some insurers are waiving cost-sharing payments for coronavirus disease 2019 treatment, self-insured employers remain exempt. As of now, policy responses may be insufficient to reduce the financial burden on consumer-directed health plans enrollees with respiratory hospitalizations related to coronavirus disease 2019.

Objectives Behavioral health home (BHH) models have been developed to integrate physical and mental health care and address medical comorbidities for individuals with serious mental illnesses. Previous studies identified population health management capacity and coordination with primary care providers as key barriers to BHH implementation. This study examines the BHH leaders' perceptions of and organizational capacity to conduct these functions within the community mental health programs implementing BHHs in Maryland. Methods Interviews and surveys were conducted with 72 implementation leaders and 627 front-line staff from 46 of 48 Maryland BHH programs. In-depth coding of the population health management and primary care coordination themes identified subthemes related to these topics. Results BHH staff described cultures supportive of evidence-based practices, but limited ability to effectively perform population health management or primary care coordination. Tension between population health management and direct, clinical care, lack of experience, and state regulations for service delivery were identified as key challenges for population health management. Engaging primary care providers was the primary barrier to care coordination. Health information technology and staffing were barriers to both functions. Conclusions BHHs face a number of barriers to effective implementation of core program elements. To improve programs' ability to conduct effective population health management and care coordination and meaningfully impact health outcomes for individuals with serious mental illness, multiple strategies are needed, including formalized protocols, training for staff, changes to financing mechanisms, and health information technology improvements.

Background Safe consumption sites are spaces where people can legally use pre-obtained drugs under medical supervision and are currently in operation in Canada, Australia and Western Europe. These sites are effective in reducing opioid overdose mortality and other harms associated with opioid use, such as HIV infection, and increasing drug treatment entry. Various U.S. communities are considering establishing safe consumption sites, however, only 29% of U.S. adults support their legalization. This purpose of this study is to assess what types of arguments resonate with the public in support of and opposition to legalizing safe consumption sites to combat the opioid epidemic. Methods A public opinion survey of U.S. adults in July-August 2017 (N = 1004) used a probability-based sample of respondents from a large, nationally representative online panel. The survey examined the public’s perception of the strength of common arguments offered in support of and opposition to legalizing safe consumption sites. Arguments were identified through a detailed scan of news media coverage, public reports, and advocacy materials. Results The national sample of U.S. adults rated all arguments opposing legalization of safe consumption sites as stronger than any of the arguments supporting legalization. The most highly rated opposing arguments were that public funds were better spent on addiction treatment, and that sites were allowing illegal activity and encouraging people to use drugs. The highest rated arguments supporting legalization were that safe consumption sites were a better alternative than arresting people for using drugs, they would reduce HIV and hepatitis C by encouraging safe injection practices, and that they would lower emergency department admission and hospitalization costs. Conclusion Legalization of this evidence-based harm reduction approach in U.S. communities will be difficult to advance without public education to confront persistent myths that safe consumption sites encourage drug use and do not facilitate treatment access.

This cross-sectional study compares health care spending among high-deductible health plan vs traditional plan enrollees with substance use and mental health disorders.

We examine Americans' support for two evidence-based harm reduction strategies – safe consumption sites and syringe exchange programs – and their attitudes about individuals who use opioids. We conducted a web-based survey of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults in July–August 2017 ( N = 1004). We measured respondents' support for legalizing safe consumption sites and syringe services programs in their communities and their attitudes toward people who use opioids. We used ordered logistic regression to assess how stigmatizing attitudes toward people who use opioids, political party identification, and demographic characteristics correlated with support for the two harm reduction strategies. Twenty-nine percent of Americans supported legalizing safe consumption sites and 39% supported legalizing syringe services programs. Respondents reported high levels of stigmatizing attitudes toward people who use opioids: 16% of respondents were willing to have a person using opioids marry into their family and 28% were willing to have a person using opioids start working closely with them on a job, and 27% and 10% of respondents rated persons who use opioids as deserving (versus worthless) and strong (versus weak). Stigmatizing attitudes were associated with lower support for legalizing safe consumption sites and syringe services programs. Democrats and Independents were more likely than Republicans to support both strategies. Stigmatizing attitudes toward people who use opioids are a key modifiable barrier to garnering the public support needed to fully implement evidence-based harm reduction strategies to combat the opioid epidemic. Dissemination and evaluation of stigma reduction campaigns are a public health priority.

Despite the proliferation of initiatives to integrate services for people with serious mental illness (SMI), measures of distinct dimensions of integration, such as spatial arrangement and care team expertise, are lacking. Such measures are needed to support organizations' assessment of progress toward integrated service delivery. We developed measures characterizing integration of behavioral, somatic, and social services to operationalize the integrated care dimensions conceived by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. In a survey fielded to 46 Maryland Medicaid health homes (response rate: 96%) serving adults with SMI during 2015-2016, we found that these measures provided a useful description of variation across dimensions of integration.

OBJECTIVES: There is substantial variation in treatment intensity among children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study asks whether policies that target health care utilization for ASD affect children differentially based on this variation. Specifically, we examine the impact of state-level insurance mandates that require commercial insurers to cover certain treatments for ASD for any fully-insured plan. METHODS: Using insurance claims between 2008 and 2012 from three national insurers, we used a difference-in-differences approach to compare children with ASD who were subject to mandates to children with ASD who were not. To allow for differential effects, we estimated quantile regressions that evaluate the impact of mandates across the spending distributions of three outcomes: (1) monthly spending on ASD-specific outpatient services, (2) monthly spending on ASD-specific inpatient services, and (3) quarterly spending on psychotropic medications. RESULTS: The change in spending on ASD-specific outpatient services attributable to mandates varied based on the child’s level of spending. For those children with ASD who were subject to the mandate, monthly spending for a child in the 95(th) percentile of the ASD-specific outpatient spending distribution increased by $1,460 (p

Objective We conducted a case study examining implementation of Maryland's Medicaid health home program, a unique model for integration of behavioral, somatic, and social services for people with serious mental illness (SMI) in the psychiatric rehabilitation program setting. Method We conducted interviews and surveys with health home leaders (N = 72) and front-line staff (N = 627) representing 46 of the 48 total health home programs active during the November 2015–December 2016 study period. We measured the structural and service characteristics of the 46 health home programs and leaders' and staff members' perceptions of program implementation. Results Health home program structure varied across sites: for example, 15% of programs had co-located primary care providers and 76% had onsite supported employment providers. Most leaders and staff viewed the health home program as having strong organizational fit with psychiatric rehabilitation programs' organizational structures and missions, but noted implementation challenges around health IT, population health management, and coordination with external providers. Conclusion Maryland's psychiatric rehabilitation-based health home is a promising model for integration of behavioral, somatic, and social services for people with SMI but may be strengthened by additional policy and implementation supports, including incentives for external providers to engage in care coordination with health home providers.

Stigma toward people with opioid use disorder (OUD) is pervasive in clinical settings, impeding delivery of high-quality care. To date, no study has evaluated the effect of different stigma-reduction messages or messengers among health care professionals.To evaluate the effect of OUD-related messages delivered by different messengers on stigma and attitudes toward people with OUD among health care professionals.This randomized clinical trial examined the effects of OUD-related messages delivered by a visual campaign alone or in combination with a written narrative vignette from the perspective of 1 of 3 messengers. Health care professionals in the US were recruited from 2 national online survey panels (Ipsos KnowledgePanel and SurveyHealthcareGlobus). A total of 1842 participants completed a web-based survey measuring stigma toward people with OUD from November 13 to 30, 2020.Eight groups were exposed to 1 of 2 message frames. One frame (Words Matter) emphasized the harm of stigmatizing language, and the other (Medication Treatment Works) focused on the effectiveness of medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of OUD. Message frames were communicated through either a visual campaign alone or a visual campaign in combination with a written narrative vignette from the perspective of a simulated patient with OUD, a clinician, or a health care system administrator.Dimensions of stigma toward people with OUD were measured on 5-point Likert scales that included items about desire for social distance from people with OUD, perception of individual blame for OUD, perspective of OUD as a medical condition, and support for increased governmental spending on OUD treatment. The level of warmth felt toward people with OUD was measured by a feeling thermometer (range, 0-100 points).Among 1842 participants, the mean (SD) age was 47 (13) years; 1324 participants (71.9%) were female, 145 (7.9%) were Hispanic, 140 (7.6%) were non-Hispanic Black, 1344 (73.0%) were non-Hispanic White, and 213 (11.6%) were of other non-Hispanic race (ie, individuals who did not self-report race as Black or White and did not self-report ethnicity as Hispanic). Compared with nonexposure, exposure to the combination of visual campaign and narrative vignette communicating the importance of nonstigmatizing language from the perspective of a patient with OUD was associated with a lower probability (difference, -16.8 percentage points, 95% CI, -26.1 to -7.4; P .001) of unwillingness to have a person with OUD marry into the family (a measure of social distance preference) and a 7.2-point (95% CI, 3.2-11.1; P .001) higher warmth rating. Participants exposed to the combined visual campaign and patient vignette about the value of medication treatment for OUD also had significantly lower levels of stigma compared with those in the nonexposed control group (eg, unwillingness to have a person with OUD as a neighbor: difference, -15.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -24.6 to -6.0; P = .001).In this study, messages about nonstigmatizing language and effective medication for OUD reduced stigma among health care professionals. Stigma-reduction efforts targeting health care professionals may improve health care system capacity to serve people with OUD.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05127707.

Despite high burden and poor rates of treatment, public support for allocating resources to improving mental illness and substance use disorder treatment is low. A growing body of research suggests that effective policy communication strategies can increase public support for policies benefitting people with these conditions. In October 2015, the Center for Mental Health and Addiction Policy Research at Johns Hopkins University convened an expert forum with the goals of identifying what is currently known about the effectiveness of such policy communication strategies and producing a set of recommendations for future research. Key forum conclusions include that communication strategies using personal narratives to engage audiences have the potential to increase public support for policies benefiting those with mental illness or substance use disorders. Specifically, narratives combining personal stories with depictions of structural barriers to mental illness and substance use disorder treatment can increase the public’s willingness to invest in the treatment system without increasing stigma. Depictions of mental illness and violence also increase the public’s willingness to invest in mental health services, but are no more effective than messages about structural barriers to treatment and significantly increase public stigma toward people with mental illness. Future research should prioritize development and evaluation of communication strategies to increase public support for evidence-based substance use disorder policies, including harm reduction-oriented policies such as needle exchange programs and policies expanding treatment.

Objective Many states with mandates requiring commercial insurers to cover autism spectrum disorder (ASD) health services specify upper age limits above which coverage is no longer mandated. It is unknown what effects these age caps have on health service use and spending among adolescents who have exceeded the age cap. Method Using administrative claims data from 3 national commercial insurers, a difference-in-differences approach was used to estimate effects of age caps on health service use and spending among adolescents with ASD. Statistical models compared changes in use and spending between those above versus below the age cap among individuals eligible versus ineligible for mandated coverage. The analytic sample included data from 2008 through 2012 on 7,845 individuals (151,976 person-months) ages 10 to 21 years in 11 states imposing mandate age caps going into effect during adolescence. Results Age caps were associated with 4.2 percentage point (95% CI = −7.0, −1.5) lower probability of any ASD-specific service use in a month and $69 less (95% CI = −112, −$26) in average monthly spending on ASD-specific services than would have been expected given concomitant pre−post age cap differences among individuals in the same states who were never eligible for mandate-covered services. In addition, age caps were associated with $99 (95% CI = −$168, −$30) lower average monthly spending on all health care services. Conclusion Insurance mandates that include age caps going into effect during adolescence reduce health service use and spending among individuals with ASD during a critical phase of the life course.

Background Four million individuals in the U.S. criminal-legal system are supervised in the community under probation or parole. Sentences to community supervision often mandate participation in substance use treatment. Yet evidence-based treatment with medication (i.e., methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) is rarely offered to people under community supervision with opioid use disorder (OUD). This qualitative study explores the structural and organizational factors shaping OUD medication treatment use in community supervision. Methods We conducted in-depth interviews with 31 community supervision professionals. Thematic analysis characterized interview participants’ perceptions of the key factors shaping use of OUD medications in community supervision. Findings Findings indicate that authorities making decisions about OUD treatment include community supervision agencies, treatment providers, judges and courts, and jails and prisons. Agencies with more rehabilitative cultural orientations are more forgiving of relapse and supportive of OUD medications. Punishment/enforcement orientations align with an emphasis on surveillance and drug testing, which can inhibit medication treatment and interrupt continuity of care. Community supervision agencies generally reported deference to the recommendations of substance use treatment providers regarding the details of treatment, including the use of medication. Given that most treatment providers do not offer OUD medication, community supervision agencies must develop a sophisticated understanding of the various services offered by local treatment providers to tailor referrals accordingly, a responsibility for which they may be inadequately trained. Conclusions Efforts to improve engagement with medication treatment in U.S. community supervision settings could have a significant impact on reincarceration, morbidity, and mortality among individuals with OUD under supervision.

Forty-six states and the District of Columbia have enacted insurance mandates that require commercial insurers to cover treatment for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study examined whether implementing autism mandates altered service use or spending among commercially insured children with ASD. We compared children age twenty-one or younger who were eligible for mandates to children not subject to mandates using 2008-12 claims data from three national insurers. Increases in service use and spending attributable to state mandates were detected for all outcomes. Mandates were associated with a 3.4-percentage-point increase in monthly use and a $77 increase in monthly spending on ASD-specific services. Effects were larger for younger children and increased with the number of years since mandate implementation. These increases suggest that state mandates are an effective tool for broadening access to autism treatment under commercial insurance.

Background The morbidity and mortality burden of the US opioid epidemic falls heavily on reproductive-age women. Information on the patterns of and sources for non-medical use of prescription opioids among reproductive age women, including pregnant women, will inform public health and prevention efforts to mitigate the effects of the opioid epidemic. This study characterized non-medical use of prescription opioids among reproductive-age U.S. women, with a focus on pregnancy status. Methods We used nationally-representative data from the National Survey of Drug Use and Health (2005–2014) to examine non-medical use (NMU) of prescription opioids in the past 30 days among females ages 18–44 (N = 154,179), distinguishing pregnant women (N = 8069). We used multivariable logistic regression to describe reported sources of opioids, including opioids obtained from a doctor, friend or relative, dealer, or other source. Results Nearly 1% of pregnant women and 2.3% of non-pregnant reproductive-age women reported opioid NMU in the past 30 days. Forty-six percent of pregnant women identified a doctor as their source compared with 27.6% of non-pregnant women reporting NMU. Pregnant women reported a friend or relative as their source of opioids less frequently than non-pregnant women (53.8% versus 75.0%), and some pregnant and non-pregnant women acquired opioids from a dealer (14.6% and 10.6%). Conclusion Opioid NMU among reproductive-age women is a complex public health challenge affecting a vulnerable population. Pregnant women were more likely than non-pregnant women to list a doctor as their source of opioids for NMU, suggesting the need for targeted policies to address physician prescribing during pregnancy.

Prescription opioid use disorder and overdose have emerged as significant public health challenges in the past 15 years. Little is known about public attitudes toward individuals who have developed a prescription opioid use disorder and whether these attitudes affect support for policy interventions. This study examined social stigma toward individuals with prescription opioid use disorder and tested whether stigma was associated with support for various policy interventions.A nationally representative Web-based survey was conducted from January 31 to February 28, 2014. The 1,071 respondents reported on their beliefs about and attitudes toward persons affected by prescription opioid use disorder and rated their support for various policy interventions. Ordered logistic regression models estimated the association between stigma and public support for punitive and public health-oriented policies.Most respondents viewed this disorder as affecting all groups-racial and ethnic, income, and geographic area of residence groups-fairly equally, despite epidemiological data demonstrating that certain populations have been disproportionately burdened. Respondents expressed high levels of stigma toward individuals with prescription opioid use disorder. Levels of stigma were generally similar among those with and without experience with prescription opioid use disorder, either one's own or that of a relative or close friend. Higher levels of stigma were associated with greater support for punitive policies and lower support for public health-oriented policies.Reframing the issue to emphasize the structural factors contributing to prescription opioid use disorder and the barriers to accessing evidence-based treatment might improve support for policies that benefit affected individuals.

This study evaluated the association of the Maryland Medicaid behavioral health home (BHH) integrated care program with cancer screening.Using administrative claims data from October 2012 to September 2016, the authors measured cancer screening among 12,176 adults in Maryland's psychiatric rehabilitation program who were eligible for cervical (N=6,811), breast (N=1,658), and colorectal (N=3,430) cancer screening. Marginal structural modeling was used to examine the association between receipt of annual cancer screening and whether participants had ever enrolled in a BHH (enrolled: N=3,298, 27%; not enrolled: N=8,878, 73%).Relative to nonenrollment, BHH enrollment was associated with increased screening for cervical and breast cancer but not for colorectal cancer. Predicted annual rates remained low, even in BHHs.Despite estimates of improvements in cervical and breast cancer screening after BHH implementation, cancer screening rates remained suboptimal. Broader cancer screening interventions are needed to improve cancer screening for people with mental illness.

Gun-related deaths are on the rise in the US, and following recent mass shootings, gun policy has emerged as an issue in the 2020 election cycle. Political advertising is an increasingly important tool for candidates seeking office to communicate their policy priorities. Over $6 billion was spent on political ads in the 2016 election cycle, and spending in the 2020 cycle is expected to be even higher. Tracking gun-related political advertising over time can offer critical insights into how candidates view the salience of gun policy in the context of the 2020 election and beyond. We analyzed the coverage of guns in over fourteen million candidate-related television ad airings for presidential, congressional, gubernatorial, and state legislative races over four election cycles: 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018. The share of candidate-related ad airings that referred to guns increased from 1 percent in the 2012 cycle to over 8 percent in the 2018 cycle. Pro-gun rights content dominated but dropped from 86 percent of airings mentioning guns in the 2012 cycle to 45 percent in the 2018 cycle. Advertising in favor of gun regulation and against the National Rifle Association increased over time. These shifts offer insights into how gun issues are being framed in the 2020 election cycle.

Public stigma characterizes three leading health issues: prescription opioid addiction, obesity, and cigarette smoking. Attributions of individual responsibility are often embedded in negative public attitudes around these issues and can be important to stigma's development and reduction. Research suggests that narrative messages may hold promise for influencing attributions and stigma in these health contexts. Using a national sample of American adults from an online panel (N = 5,007), we conducted a survey-embedded randomized experiment, assigning participants to read one of six messages about one of three health issues. All participants read a statement detailing the magnitude of their assigned health problem, after which some respondents received a short inoculation message (serving as a comparison group) or a narrative message emphasizing external factors while acknowledging personal responsibility for the issue. Some participants also read a counter message emphasizing personal responsibility for the health issue to replicate competitive messaging environments surrounding these issues. Relative to those who received only the magnitude of problem message (comparison group 1) or the magnitude of problem and inoculation messages (comparison group 2), the narrative message reduced prescription opioid addiction stigma and increased attributions of responsibility to groups beyond the individual. Narrative effects were mixed for obesity, had no effect on attributions or stigma around cigarette smoking, and were generally consistent whether or not respondents received a counter message. Narrative messages may be a promising approach for shifting responsibility attributions and reducing public stigma around prescription opioid addiction, and may have some relevance for obesity stigma-reduction efforts.

Medications such as methadone and buprenorphine are effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), but levels of use remain low. Given the importance of the news media as a source of health information for the public and its role in shaping knowledge about these medications, we examined reporting on OUD medication treatment amid the opioid crisis. Analyzing news media reporting can provide insight into the public dialogue around this issue. Standardized search terms were used to query high-circulation/viewership US news sources in the period 2007-16 for stories about OUD medications. News reporting about the medications increased substantially in 2015-16. Local news coverage in states with high opioid overdose rates highlighted more negative than positive consequences of OUD medication use. Fewer than 40 percent of news stories about the medications mentioned that they were underused. Although addiction experts view underuse of OUD medications as a significant barrier to combating the opioid crisis, our findings suggest that underuse has not been framed as a problem in most news media reporting on these medications. Public health and addiction experts need to develop more effective strategies for disseminating information on the value of these medications in reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVES: Most states have passed insurance mandates requiring health plans to cover services for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Research reveals that these mandates increased treated prevalence, service use, and spending on ASD-related care. As employer-sponsored insurance shifts toward high-deductible health plans (HDHPs), it is important to understand how mandates affect children with ASD in HDHPs relative to traditional, low-deductible plans. METHODS: Insurance claims for 2008–2012 for children covered by 3 large US insurers (United Healthcare, Aetna, and Humana) available through the Health Care Cost Institute were used to compare the effects of mandates on ASD-related spending for children in HDHPs and traditional health plans. RESULTS: Relative to children in traditional plans, mandates were associated with higher average monthly spending increases for children in HDHPs. Mandate-attributable spending differences between children enrolled in HDHPs relative to traditional plans were $77 for ASD-specific services (95% confidence interval [CI]: $10 to $144), $125 for outpatient health services (95% CI: $26 to $223), and $144 for all health services (95% CI: $36 to $253). These spending differentials were driven by differences in plan spending and not out-of-pocket (OOP) spending. CONCLUSIONS: Spending on ASD-related services attributable to autism mandates was higher among children in HDHPs, but higher spending did not translate into a greater OOP burden. For families with consistently high health care expenditures on ASD-related services, high-deductible products may be worth considering in the context of mandate laws. Families in mandate states with children with ASD enrolled in HDHPs were able to increase service use without paying more OOP.

Opioid pain reliever addiction has increased among women of reproductive age over the last fifteen years. News media and public attention have focused on the implications of this trend for infants exposed to opioids prenatally, with state policy responses varying in the extent to which they are punitive or public health oriented. We fielded a six-group randomized experiment among a nationally representative sample of US adults to test the effects of narratives portraying a woman with opioid pain reliever addiction during pregnancy on beliefs about people addicted to opioid pain relievers, perceptions of treatment effectiveness, policy attitudes, and emotional responses. Portraying a high socioeconomic status (SES) woman in the narrative lowered perceptions of individual blame for addiction and reduced public support for punitive policies. Depicting the barriers to treatment faced by a low SES woman lowered support for punitive policies and increased support for expanded insurance coverage for treatment. The extent to which narratives portraying successfully treated addiction affected public attitudes depended on the SES of the woman portrayed. These findings can inform the development of communication strategies to reduce stigma toward this population, reduce support for punitive policies, and increase support for more public health-oriented approaches to addressing this problem.

News media coverage of the U.S. opioid epidemic influences Americans' knowledge of and preferences for solutions to address the crisis. From 1998 to 2012, news media coverage of the opioid epidemic focused on criminal justice-oriented solutions. We examine whether and how news coverage of solutions has shifted in the recent years of the crisis. We analyzed a random sample of 600 U.S. news stories published/aired by high circulation/viewership national and local print and television news outlets from 2013 to 2017. We examined the proportion of news stories mentioning treatment, harm reduction, prevention, criminal justice, opioid prescribing, pharmaceutical manufacturer, insurer, and other solutions. News stories were coded using a structured coding instrument, and 200 news stories were double-coded to ensure interrater reliability. Data were collected and analyzed in 2018. Treatment (mentioned in 33% of news stories), harm reduction (30%), and prevention (24%) solutions were the most frequently mentioned types of solutions. Several evidence-based public health solutions received little news coverage: medication treatment for opioid use disorder was mentioned in 9% of news stories and the harm reduction solutions syringe services programs and safe consumption sites were mentioned in 5% and 2% of news stories. While news coverage showed a promising emphasis on public health-oriented solutions, efforts to increase news coverage of examples of effective opioid use disorder treatment and harm reduction solutions are needed.

BACKGROUND: The health care costs associated with treating autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children can be substantial. State-level mandates that require insurers to cover ASD-specific services may lessen the financial burden families face by shifting health care spending to insurers. METHODS: We estimated the effects of ASD mandates on out-of-pocket spending, insurer spending, and the share of total spending paid out of pocket for ASD-specific services. We used administrative claims data from 2008 to 2012 from 3 commercial insurers, and took a difference-in-differences approach in which children who were subject to mandates were compared with children who were not. Because mandates have heterogeneous effects based on the extent of children’s service use, we performed subsample analyses by calculating quintiles based on average monthly total spending on ASD-specific services. The sample included 106 977 children with ASD across 50 states. RESULTS: Mandates increased out-of-pocket spending but decreased the share of spending paid out of pocket for ASD-specific services on average. The effects were driven largely by children in the highest-spending quintile, who experienced an average increase of $35 per month in out-of-pocket spending (P < .001) and a 4 percentage point decline in the share of spending paid out of pocket (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: ASD mandates shifted health care spending for ASD-specific services from families to insurers. However, families in the highest-spending quintile still spent an average of >$200 per month out of pocket on these services. To help ease their financial burden, policies in which children with higher service use are targeted may be warranted.