Linda Diem Tran1, Haiyong Xu1, Francisca Azocar1, Susan L Ettner1. 1. Ms. Tran is with the Department of Health Policy and Management, Jonathan and Karin Fielding School of Public Health, and Dr. Xu and Dr. Ettner are with the Division of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, David Geffen School of Medicine, all at the University of California, Los Angeles. Dr. Azocar is with OptumHealth Behavioral Solutions, San Francisco.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined specialty behavioral health treatment patterns among employer-insured adults in same- and different-gender domestic partnerships and marriages. METHODS: The study used behavioral health service claims (2008-2013) from Optum to estimate gender-stratified penetration rates of behavioral health service use by couple type and partnership status among partnered adults ages 18-64 (N=12,727,292 person-years) and levels of use among those with any use (conditional analyses). Least-squares, logistic, and zero-truncated negative binomial regression analyses adjusted for age, employer and plan characteristics, and provider supply and for sociodemographic factors in sensitivity analyses. Generalized estimating equations were used to address within-group correlation of adults clustered in employer groups. RESULTS: Both women and men in same-gender marriages or domestic partnerships had higher rates of behavioral health service use, particularly diagnostic evaluation, individual psychotherapy, and medication management, and those in treatment had, on average, more psychotherapy visits than those in different-gender marriages. Behavioral health treatment patterns were similar between women in same-gender domestic partnerships and same-gender marriages, but they diverged between men in same-gender domestic partnerships and same-gender marriages. Moderation analysis results indicated that adults with same-gender partners living in states with fewer legal protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons were less likely than adults with same-gender partners in LGBT-friendly states to receive behavioral health treatment. Sensitivity analyses did not affect findings. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral health treatment patterns varied by couple type, partnership status, and gender. Results highlight the importance of increasing service acceptability and delivering inclusive, culturally relevant behavioral health treatment for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined specialty behavioral health treatment patterns among employer-insured adults in same- and different-gender domestic partnerships and marriages. METHODS: The study used behavioral health service claims (2008-2013) from Optum to estimate gender-stratified penetration rates of behavioral health service use by couple type and partnership status among partnered adults ages 18-64 (N=12,727,292 person-years) and levels of use among those with any use (conditional analyses). Least-squares, logistic, and zero-truncated negative binomial regression analyses adjusted for age, employer and plan characteristics, and provider supply and for sociodemographic factors in sensitivity analyses. Generalized estimating equations were used to address within-group correlation of adults clustered in employer groups. RESULTS: Both women and men in same-gender marriages or domestic partnerships had higher rates of behavioral health service use, particularly diagnostic evaluation, individual psychotherapy, and medication management, and those in treatment had, on average, more psychotherapy visits than those in different-gender marriages. Behavioral health treatment patterns were similar between women in same-gender domestic partnerships and same-gender marriages, but they diverged between men in same-gender domestic partnerships and same-gender marriages. Moderation analysis results indicated that adults with same-gender partners living in states with fewer legal protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons were less likely than adults with same-gender partners in LGBT-friendly states to receive behavioral health treatment. Sensitivity analyses did not affect findings. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral health treatment patterns varied by couple type, partnership status, and gender. Results highlight the importance of increasing service acceptability and delivering inclusive, culturally relevant behavioral health treatment for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons.
Entities:
Keywords:
Behavioral health services, Public policy issues, Homosexuality; Utilization patterns
Authors: Mark L Hatzenbuehler; Conall O'Cleirigh; Chris Grasso; Kenneth Mayer; Steven Safren; Judith Bradford Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Mark L Hatzenbuehler; Katie A McLaughlin; Katherine M Keyes; Deborah S Hasin Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2010-01-14 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Michael King; Joanna Semlyen; Sharon See Tai; Helen Killaspy; David Osborn; Dmitri Popelyuk; Irwin Nazareth Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2008-08-18 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Ulrike Boehmer; Al Ozonoff; Michael Winter; Flora Berklein; Jennifer Potter; Kevan L Hartshorn; Kevin C Ward; Rachel M Ceballos; Melissa A Clark Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 6.921