The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act evaluation study: Child and adolescent behavioral health service expenditures and utilization

What Do We Know About Depression Among Youth and How Can We Make Progress Toward Improved Understanding and Reducing Distress? A New Hope

This paper summarizes many findings about depression among children and adolescents. Depression is prevalent, highly distressing, and exerts considerable burden worldwide. Rates surge from childhood through young adulthood and have increased over the last decade. Many risk factors have been identified, and evidence-based interventions exist targeting mostly individual-level changes via psychological or pharmacological means. At the same time, the field appears stuck and has not achieved considerable progress in advancing scientific understanding of depression's features or delivering interventions to meet the challenge of youth depression's high and growing prevalence. This paper adopts several positions to address these challenges and move the field forward. First, we emphasize reinvigoration of construct validation approaches that may better characterize youth depression's phenomenological features and inform more valid and reliable assessments that can enhance scientific understanding and improve interventions for youth depression. To this end, history and philosophical principles affecting depression's conceptualization and measurement are considered. Second, we suggest expanding the range and targets of treatments and prevention efforts beyond current practice guidelines for evidence-based interventions. This broader suite of interventions includes structural- and system-level change focused at community and societal levels (e.g., evidence-based economic anti-poverty interventions) and personalized interventions with sufficient evidence base. We propose that by focusing on the FORCE (Fundamentals, Openness, Relationships, Constructs, Evidence), youth depression research can provide new hope.

Factors Affecting State-Level Enforcement of the Federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act: A Cross-Case Analysis of Four States

CONTEXT

The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) requires coverage for mental health and substance use disorder (MH/SUD) benefits to be no more restrictive than for medical/surgical benefits in commercial health plans. State insurance departments oversee enforcement for certain plans. Insufficient enforcement is one potential source of continued MH/SUD treatment gaps among commercial insurance enrollees. This study explored state-level factors that may drive enforcement variation.

METHODS

The authors conducted a four-state multiple-case study to explore factors influencing state insurance offices' enforcement of MHPAEA. They interviewed 21 individuals who represented state government offices, advocacy organizations, professional organizations, and a national insurer. Their analysis included a within-case content analysis and a cross-case framework analysis.

FINDINGS

Common themes included insurance office relationships with other stakeholders, policy complexity, and political priority. Relationships between insurance offices and other stakeholders varied between states. MHPAEA complexity posed challenges for interpretation and application. Policy champions influenced enforcement via priorities of insurance commissioners, governors, and legislatures. Where enforcement of MHPAEA was not prioritized by any actors, there was minimal state enforcement.

CONCLUSIONS

Within a state, enforcement of MHPAEA is influenced by insurance office relationships, legal interpretation, and political priorities. These unique state factors present significant challenges to uniform enforcement.

Contextual determinants associated with children's and adolescents' mental health care utilization: a systematic review

Determinants at the contextual level are important for children's and adolescents' mental health care utilization, as this is the level where policy makers and care providers can intervene to improve access to and provision of care. The objective of this review was to summarize the evidence on contextual determinants associated with mental health care utilization in children and adolescents. A systematic literature search in five electronic databases was conducted in August 2021 and retrieved 6439 unique records. Based on eight inclusion criteria, 74 studies were included. Most studies were rated as high quality (79.7%) and adjusted for mental health problems (66.2%). The determinants that were identified were categorized into four levels: organizational, community, public policy or macro-environmental. There was evidence of a positive association between mental health care utilization and having access to a school-based health center, region of residence, living in an urban area, living in an area with high accessibility of mental health care, living in an area with high socio-economic status, having a mental health parity law, a mental health screening program, fee-for-service plan (compared to managed care plan), extension of health insurance coverage and collaboration between organizations providing care. For the other 35 determinants, only limited evidence was available. To conclude, this systematic review identifies ten contextual determinants of children's and adolescents' mental health care utilization, which can be influenced by policymakers and care providers. Implications and future directions for research are discussedPROSPERO ID: CRD42021276033.

The impact of Timothy's Law on hospitalization among patients with mental health conditions in New York State

Background

Timothy's law to reduce mental health care disparities was enacted in January 2007 in New York state (NY). According to Timothy's law, "if a patient is suffering from a Biologically Based Mental Illness, or is a Child with Serious Emotional Disturbances, the Inpatient mental health benefit will be the same as for any other illness". An assessment of its impact on inpatient mental health care is lacking. We provide a rigorous study of this policy intervention’s effect over the first year of its implementation.

Methods

We used a quasi-experimental design to combine the difference-in-difference method and propensity score weighting. Data are from inpatient records in NY and California (CA) (as a control) between January 2006 to December 2006 (the pre-enactment year in NY) and January to December 2007 (the enactment year) for non-Medicare/Medicaid patients hospitalized in both years with specific illnesses covered by Timothy's Law. Change in length of stay from 2006 to 2007 was measured for each patient, and the differences observed in NY and California were compared to each other (Difference-in-Difference), with differences in the characteristics of patients in NY and California addressed through Propensity Score Weighting (PSW).

Results

Before Timothy's Law was enacted (2006), length of stay (LOS) in NY was 16.3 days on average, and length of stay per hospitalization (LOSPH) was 11.72 days on average for the 1237 patients under study in 2006. In 2007, LOS increased by 4.91 days in NY (95% CI (2.89, 7.01)) compared with similar patients in California, and LOSPH by 3.25 days (95% CI (1.96, 4.57)). Among patients with serious mental illness diagnoses, LOS in NY increased by 7.07 days (95% CI (4.15, 10.17)), and LOSPH by 4.04 days (95% CI (1.93, 6.03)) compared to California.

Conclusions

Our study strongly suggests that, within the time frame of just a single year, Timothy's Law significantly increased inpatient mental healthcare utilization in NY. Our study raises the possibility that similar laws in other locations could have similar effects.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13033-022-00535-w.