Alene Kennedy-Hendricks1,2, Andrew J Epstein3, Elizabeth A Stuart4,2,5, Rebecca L Haffajee6, Emma E McGinty4,2,5, Alisa B Busch7,8, Haiden A Huskamp8, Colleen L Barry4,2,3,5. 1. Departments of Health Policy and Management and alene@jhu.edu. 2. Center for Mental Health and Addiction Policy Research, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Leonard Davis Institute for Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Departments of Health Policy and Management and. 5. Mental Health, and. 6. Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 7. McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts; and. 8. Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Families of children with mental health conditions face heavy economic burdens. One of the objectives of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) is to reduce the financial burden for those with intensive mental health service needs. Few researchers to date have examined MHPAEA's effects on children with mental health conditions and those with particularly high mental health expenditures. METHODS: A difference-in-differences approach was used to compare commercially insured children ages 3 to 18 years (in 2008) who were continuously enrolled in plans newly subject to parity under MHPAEA to children continuously enrolled in plans never subject to parity. Data included inpatient, outpatient, and pharmaceutical claims for 2008-2012 from 3 national commercial insurers. We examined annual mental health service use and spending outcomes. RESULTS: Among children with mental health conditions who were enrolled in plans subject to parity, parity was associated with $140 (95% confidence interval: -$196 to -$84) lower average annual out-of-pocket (OOP) mental health spending than expected given changes in the comparison group. Among children who were ≥85th percentile in total mental health spending, parity was associated with $234 (-$391 to -$76) lower average annual OOP mental health spending. CONCLUSIONS: MHPAEA was associated with increased financial protection on average for children with mental health conditions and among those at the higher end of the spending distribution. However, estimated reductions in OOP spending were likely too modest to have substantially reduced financial burden on families of children with particularly high mental health expenditures.
BACKGROUND: Families of children with mental health conditions face heavy economic burdens. One of the objectives of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) is to reduce the financial burden for those with intensive mental health service needs. Few researchers to date have examined MHPAEA's effects on children with mental health conditions and those with particularly high mental health expenditures. METHODS: A difference-in-differences approach was used to compare commercially insured children ages 3 to 18 years (in 2008) who were continuously enrolled in plans newly subject to parity under MHPAEA to children continuously enrolled in plans never subject to parity. Data included inpatient, outpatient, and pharmaceutical claims for 2008-2012 from 3 national commercial insurers. We examined annual mental health service use and spending outcomes. RESULTS: Among children with mental health conditions who were enrolled in plans subject to parity, parity was associated with $140 (95% confidence interval: -$196 to -$84) lower average annual out-of-pocket (OOP) mental health spending than expected given changes in the comparison group. Among children who were ≥85th percentile in total mental health spending, parity was associated with $234 (-$391 to -$76) lower average annual OOP mental health spending. CONCLUSIONS: MHPAEA was associated with increased financial protection on average for children with mental health conditions and among those at the higher end of the spending distribution. However, estimated reductions in OOP spending were likely too modest to have substantially reduced financial burden on families of children with particularly high mental health expenditures.
Authors: Howard H Goldman; Richard G Frank; M Audrey Burnam; Haiden A Huskamp; M Susan Ridgely; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Alexander S Young; Colleen L Barry; Vanessa Azzone; Alisa B Busch; Susan T Azrin; Garrett Moran; Carolyn Lichtenstein; Margaret Blasinsky Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-03-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas C Buchmueller; Philip F Cooper; Mireille Jacobson; Samuel H Zuvekas Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2007-06-07 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Colleen L Barry; Alyna T Chien; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Alisa B Busch; Vanessa Azzone; Howard H Goldman; Haiden A Huskamp Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2013-02-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Amber Gayle Thalmayer; Sarah A Friedman; Francisca Azocar; Jessica M Harwood; Susan L Ettner Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2016-12-15 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Constance M Horgan; Dominic Hodgkin; Maureen T Stewart; Amity Quinn; Elizabeth L Merrick; Sharon Reif; Deborah W Garnick; Timothy B Creedon Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Matthew D Eisenberg; Shawn Du; Aditi P Sen; Alene Kennedy-Hendricks; Colleen L Barry Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Katherine L Nelson; Byron J Powell; Brent Langellier; Félice Lê-Scherban; Paul Shattuck; Kimberly Hoagwood; Jonathan Purtle Journal: Adm Policy Ment Health Date: 2022-06-23
Authors: Kaveh Ardalan; Oluwatosin Adeyemi; Dawn M Wahezi; Anne E Caliendo; Megan L Curran; Jessica Neely; Susan Kim; Colleen K Correll; Emily J Brunner; Andrea M Knight Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2020-11-27 Impact factor: 4.794