Was federal parity associated with changes in Out-of-network mental health care use and spending?

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.

Prices And Cost Sharing For Psychotherapy In Network Versus Out Of Network In The United States

Patients in the US are more likely to receive out-of-network behavioral health care, including treatment for mental health or substance use disorders, than they are to receive other medical and surgical services out of network. To date, out-of-network and in-network trends in the prices and use of ambulatory behavioral health care have been seldom described. Here we compare levels and growth of insurer-negotiated prices (allowed amounts), patient cost sharing, and use of psychotherapy services in network and out of network in a large, commercially insured US population during 2007-17. For both adult and child psychotherapy, prices and cost sharing were substantially higher out of network than they were in network. These gaps widened during the eleven-year period. Prices and cost sharing for in-network psychotherapy decreased during this period, whereas prices and cost sharing for out-of-network psychotherapy increased. Use of adult and child psychotherapy increased during this period, driven by growth of in-network rather than out-of-network use. The increasing gap in prices and cost sharing between out-of-network and in-network psychotherapy, viewed in the context of a shortage of behavioral health providers who accept insurance, may limit access to ambulatory behavioral health care.

Changes in Medicaid Acceptance by Substance Abuse Treatment Facilities After Implementation of Federal Parity

BACKGROUND

Adequate access for mental illness and substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, particularly for Medicaid enrollees, is challenging. Policy efforts, including the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA), have targeted expanded access to care. With MHPAEA, more Medicaid plans were required to increase their coverage of SUD treatment, which may impact provider acceptance of Medicaid.

OBJECTIVES

To identify changes in Medicaid acceptance by SUD treatment facilities after the implementation of MHPAEA (parity).

RESEARCH DESIGN

Observational study using an interrupted time series design.

SUBJECTS

2002-2013 data from the National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (N-SSATS) for all SUD treatment facilities was combined with state-level characteristics.

MEASURES

Primary outcome is whether a SUD treatment facility reported accepting Medicaid insurance.

RESULTS

Implementation of MHPAEA was associated with a 4.6 percentage point increase in the probability of an SUD treatment facility accepting Medicaid (P<0.001), independent of facility and state characteristics, time trends, and key characteristics of state Medicaid programs.

CONCLUSIONS

After parity, more SUD treatment facilities accepted Medicaid payments, which may ultimately increase access to care for individuals with SUD. The findings underscore how parity laws are critical policy tools for creating contexts that enable historically vulnerable and underserved populations with SUD to access needed health care.

Association of Federal Mental Health Parity Legislation With Health Care Use and Spending Among High Utilizers of Services

BACKGROUND

Decades-long efforts to require parity between behavioral and physical health insurance coverage culminated in the comprehensive federal Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the association between federal parity and changes in mental health care utilization and spending, particularly among high utilizers.

RESEARCH DESIGN

Difference-in-differences analyses compared changes before and after exposure to federal parity versus a comparison group.

SUBJECTS

Commercially insured enrollees aged 18-64 with a mental health disorder drawn from 24 states where self-insured employers were newly subject to federal parity in 2010 (exposure group), but small employers were exempt before-and-after parity (comparison group). A total of 11,226 exposure group members were propensity score matched (1:1) to comparison group members, all of whom were continuously enrolled from 1 year prepolicy to 1-2 years postpolicy.

MEASURES

Mental health outpatient visits, out-of-pocket spending for these visits, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations.

RESULTS

Relative to comparison group members, mean out-of-pocket spending per outpatient mental health visit declined among exposure enrollees by $0.74 (1.40, 0.07) and $2.03 (3.17, 0.89) in years 1 and 2 after the policy, respectively. Corresponding annual mental health visits increased by 0.31 (0.12, 0.51) and 0.59 (0.37, 0.81) per enrollee. Difference-in-difference changes were larger for the highest baseline quartile mental health care utilizers [year 2: 0.76 visits per enrollee (0.14, 1.38); relative increase 10.07%] and spenders [year 2: $-2.28 (-3.76, -0.79); relative reduction 5.91%]. There were no significant difference-in-differences changes in emergency department visits or hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

In 24 states, commercially insured high utilizers of mental health services experienced modest increases in outpatient mental health visits 2 years postparity.

Achieving Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Treatment Parity: A Quarter Century of Policy Making and Research

The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) of 2008 changed the landscape of mental health and substance use disorder coverage in the United States. The MHPAEA's comprehensiveness compared with past parity laws, including its extension of parity to plan management strategies, the so-called nonquantitative treatment limitations (NQTL), led to significant improvements in mental health care coverage. In this article, we review the history of this landmark legislation and its recent expansions to new populations, describe past research on the effects of this and other mental health/substance use disorder parity laws, and describe some directions for future research, including NQTL compliance issues, effects of parity on individuals with severe mental illness, and measurement of benefits other than mental health care use.

Federal parity law associated with increased probability of using out-of-network substance use disorder treatment services

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 requires commercial insurers providing group coverage for substance use disorder services to offer benefits for those services at a level equal to those for medical or surgical benefits. Unlike previous parity policies instituted for federal employees and in individual states, the law extends parity to out-of-network services. We conducted an interrupted time-series analysis using insurance claims from large self-insured employers to evaluate whether federal parity was associated with changes in out-of-network treatment for 525,620 users of substance use disorder services. Federal parity was associated with an increased probability of using out-of-network services, an increased average number of out-of-network outpatient visits, and increased average total spending on out-of-network services among users of those services. Our findings were broadly consistent with the contention of federal parity proponents that extending parity to out-of-network services would broaden access to substance use disorder care obtained outside of plan networks.