Community Care Publications
Community Care Publication Abstracts
Purpose of Study: To examine the effectiveness of a care management intervention to decrease readmissions and to better understand clinical and social determinants associated with readmission. Primary Practice Setting: Inpatient mental health (MH) and substance use disorder (SUD) facilities, nonhospital SUD withdrawal management and rehabilitation facilities. Methodology and Sample: The authors identified 3,950 Medicaid-enrolled individuals who received the intervention from licensed clinical staff of a behavioral health managed care organization; 2,182 individuals were eligible but did not receive the intervention, for treatment as usual (TAU). We used logistic regression to examine factors associated with readmission. Determinants of readmission were summarized through descriptive tests. Results: The intervention was associated with lower readmissions to SUD facilities compared with TAU (6.0% vs. 8.6%, p = .0002) and better follow-up to aftercare. Controlling for clinical differences between groups, regression results found increased odds of readmission for male gender (odds ratio [OR]: 1.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16–1.52, p < .0001) and dual MH and SUD diagnoses (OR: 1.52; CI: 1.29–1.79, p < .0001). Prior inpatient and case management services were also associated with increased odds for readmission. In the regression model, the intervention was not associated with decreased odds for readmission. Individuals with readmission (n = 796) were more likely to report being prescribed psychotropic medication and having housing difficulties and less likely to report having a recovery plan than those without readmission. Implications for Case Management Practice: Characteristics of Medicaid populations with hospitalization may contribute to readmission, which may be mitigated through care management intervention.
Objectives: Buprenorphine/naloxone is an effective medication for the treatment of opioid use disorder. Unlike methadone, which can only be dispensed in federally waived clinics and which must be combined with specific psychosocial treatment, buprenorphine can be dispensed by individual prescribers who have completed an 8-hour training program, with no requirement that patients receive concomitant psychotherapy. The objective of this study is to quantify the association of counseling and psychotherapy on retention in treatment. We also examine the effect of buprenorphine dosage on retention. Methods: We examined a cohort of 4987 members of a not-for-profit managed care organization serving Medicaid members in 41 counties in Pennsylvania. This cohort was selected from all members who had a full year without any medication for opioid use disorder followed by initiation of treatment with buprenorphine/naloxone in 2016 to 2017 and who remained Medicaid eligible for at least 80% of the following 2 years. Outcomes were estimated using inverse probability weighted propensity scores. Results: The addition of counseling and psychotherapy within the first 8 weeks of treatment was associated with greater total retention in treatment and there was a dose-response relationship. A 16 mg/d or greater dose of buprenorphine was also associated with greater retention. Conclusions: These results provide support for an integrated approach to treating people with an opioid use disorder, through a combination of buprenorphine pharmacotherapy and targeted counseling and psychotherapy within the first 2 months of treatment.
Community and School-Based Behavioral Health Service (CSBBH) was developed through a collaborative process that included schools, behavioral health providers, counties, and a payor. The clinical model within CSBBH relies on a common factors approach. To evaluate the effectiveness of CSBBH to meet the needs of students across a diverse state, clinical model performance and outcomes were examined for 2,584 Medicaid-eligible children aged 4.5 to 11 years in urban and rural communities. First, propensity score matching was used to compare CSBBH to Treatment as Usual (TAU). CSBBH was associated with greater improvement in child functioning and slightly lower therapeutic alliance compared to TAU. Next, the utility of the model for urban vs. rural students was compared. As expected, there were many differences at baseline between children in urban and rural settings. Compared to children from rural settings, children from urban settings were more culturally diverse and had higher rates of utilization of prior mental health services but had lower rates of complex diagnoses. Despite these differences, the service was consistently applied across schools and caregiver-reported outcomes were comparable and positive across groups. Teachers in urban and rural schools reported improvements in hyperactivity, but other outcomes (e.g., prosocial behavior, emotional symptoms) varied. This study highlights the importance of a scalable and sustainable payor–provider collaborative approach to address the needs of children across a diverse state.
Objectives: To compare patterns of psychiatric hospitalization and readmission within 30 days for Medicaid expansion (expansion) vs previously insured (legacy) samples. Study design: Retrospective analysis using Medicaid behavioral health service claims. Methods: We identified 24,044 individuals with hospitalizations in calendar years 2017 and 2018 within the network of a behavioral health managed care organization in Pennsylvania. Logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with readmission. Results: Individuals covered under expansion (n = 7,747) vs legacy (n = 16,297) were older and more likely to be male and European American, with higher rates of cooccurring mental health (MH) and substance use disorder (SUD) diagnoses, as well as lower rates of MH and SUD services in the 30 days prior and any prior MH hospitalization. A higher proportion of individuals with expansion vs legacy status were readmitted (11.3% vs 9.0%; P < .0001). Controlling for factors associated with readmission, regression showed an increased likelihood of readmission for expansion vs legacy status (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.12-1.35; P < .0001). Increased risk for readmission was also found across populations for male patients (AOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22; P = .0124), those with prior MH hospitalizations (AOR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.51-1.81; P < .0001) or other behavioral health services (AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.03-1.26; P = .0142), those with longer hospitalization episodes (AOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01; P < .0001), and those with cooccurring SUD (AOR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.44-1.74; P < .0001). Conclusions: Individuals with coverage through Medicaid expansion compared with legacy coverage have an increased risk of psychiatric readmission and may warrant targeted interventions that also address service utilization and cooccurring SUD.
Objective: Mental health service-users face important medication decisions; yet not all are active participants in the decision-making process. Little is known about which technology-supported interventions might effectively promote collaborative decision-making in psychiatric care. We compared the effectiveness of two technology-supported collaborative care decision-making approaches. Method: We used a cluster-randomized design with a mixed-methods approach. Participants were Medicaid-enrolled adults receiving psychiatric care in participating community mental health centers. Measurement-based care used computerized systematic symptom and medication screenings to inform provider decision-making. Person-centered care supported participants in completing computerized Health Reports and preparing to work with providers on collaborative decision-making about psychiatric care. Primary study outcomes included the patient experience of medication management and shared decision-making during psychiatric care. Analyses examined the impact of both approaches and explored moderating variables. We used qualitative methods to understand participation and implementation experiences. Results: Across 14 sites 2,363 participants enrolled (1,162 in measurement-based care, 1,201 in person-centered care). We observed statistically significant improvements in patient experience of medication management scores for both study arms; however, the clinical significance of this change was minor. We found no significant changes for shared decision-making. Qualitative interviews revealed a range of factors associated usefulness of intervention assessment, provider–service-user communication, and site-level logistics. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: We observed modest positive findings related to our patient-centered outcomes. We identified important implementation facilitators and barriers that can inform the implementation of future comparative effectiveness patient-centered research.