Email UpdatesLiterature Collection
Collection Insights
10K+
References
9K+
Articles
1400+
Grey Literature
4500+
Opioids & SU
The Literature Collection contains over 10,000 references for published and grey literature on the integration of behavioral health and primary care. Learn More
Use the Search feature below to find references for your terms across the entire Literature Collection, or limit your searches by Authors, Keywords, or Titles and by Year, Type, or Topic. View your search results as displayed, or use the options to: Show more references per page; Sort references by Title or Date; and Refine your search criteria. Expand an individual reference to View Details. Full-text access to the literature may be available through a link to PubMed, a DOI, or a URL. References may also be exported for use in bibliographic software (e.g., EndNote, RefWorks, Zotero).
10858 Results
2522
Cost and quality impact of Intermountain's mental health integration program
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2010
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: Most patients with mental health (MH) conditions, such as depression, receive care for their conditions from a primary care physician (PCP) in their health/medical home. Providing MH care, however, presents many challenges for the PCP, including (1) the difficulty of getting needed consultation from an MH specialist; (2) the time constraints of a busy PCP practice; (3) the complicated nature of recognizing depression, which may be described with only somatic complaints; (4) the barriers to reimbursement and compensation; and (5) associated medical and social comorbidities. Practice managers, emergency departments, and health plans are stretched to provide care for complex patients with unmet MH needs. At the same time, payment reform linked to accountable care organizations and/or episodic bundle payments, MH parity rules, and increasing MH costs to large employers and payers all highlight the critical need to identify high-quality, efficient, integrated MH care delivery practices. Over the past ten years, Intermountain Healthcare has developed a team-based approach-known as mental health integration (MHI)-for caring for these patients and their families. The team includes the PCPs and their staff, and they, in turn, are integrated with MH professionals, community resources, care management, and the patient and his or her family. The integration model goes far beyond co-location in its team-based approach; it is operationalized at the clinic, thereby improving both physician and staff satisfaction. Patients treated in MHI clinics also show improved satisfaction, lower costs, and better quality outcomes. The MHI program is financially sustainable in routinized clinics without subsidies. MHI is a successful approach to improving care for patients with MH conditions in primary care health homes.
Topic(s):
Education & Workforce
See topic collection
, Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, Medically Unexplained Symptoms
See topic collection
, Healthcare Policy
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Cost and quality impact of Intermountain's mental health integration program
2525
Cost effectiveness of brief interventions for reducing alcohol consumption
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2001
Publication Place: England
Abstract: The direct costs and health effects of a primary-care-based brief intervention for hazardous alcohol consumption were examined. The total cost of the intervention was calculated from costs associated with: marketing the intervention programme; providing training and support in the use of the intervention materials; physician time required for providing brief advice for 'at-risk' drinkers. The effect of the intervention on health outcomes was expressed in terms of number of life years saved by preventing alcohol-related deaths. This was derived by combining estimates of the impact of the programme if it were implemented nationally with available evidence on the health effects of excess alcohol consumption. Results are based on international trial evidence showing the physical resources required by the intervention and its effectiveness combined with Australian price data. The costs associated with screening and brief advice using the current intervention programme range from Aus$19.14 to Aus$21.50. The marginal costs per additional life year saved were below Aus$1873. The robustness of the model used is supported by an extensive sensitivity analysis. In comparison with existing health promotion strategies the costs and effects of the current intervention are highly encouraging.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Cost effectiveness of brief interventions for reducing alcohol consumption
2526
Cost effectiveness of text messages to reduce methamphetamine use and HIV sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2019
Topic(s):
Education & Workforce
See topic collection
, Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
, HIT & Telehealth
See topic collection
, Measures
See topic collection
, Opioids & Substance Use
See topic collection
2528
Cost of Practice Transformation in Primary Care: Joining an Accountable Care Organization
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2018
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to examine the costs related to practice transformation from the perspective of primary care organizations transitioning to become participants in Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). We pose two research questions: 1) Will a Rural Health Clinic that participates in an Accountable Care Organization see higher or lower cost per visit, and 2) If the cost per visit is higher or lower, how large will that difference be? We analyze administrative data from a panel of over 800 Rural Health Clinics for the period 2007 - 2013 using a treatment effects approach, where a clinic's participation in an ACO is viewed as a "treatment." Since the first year that an RHC could join an ACO was 2012 and our most recent year of complete data is 2013, we restricted our analysis of the impact of participation in an ACO to include only 2012 and 2013 data. The estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated (ATET) pertain to only those RHCs that joined ACOs. The results show that those 20 sample ACO RHCs experienced an average from $15.00 to $18.61 higher cost per visit than the matching non-ACO RHCs. At this very early stage of ACO development, our results must be considered very preliminary at best. Whatever conclusions we draw from these results are intended to merely suggest what might be found once many more RHCs join ACOs. The conclusions we draw from this early analysis can lay a foundation for more analysis after data are available when more RHCs join ACOs.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Cost of Practice Transformation in Primary Care: Joining an Accountable Care Organization
2529
Cost of Practice Transformation in Primary Care: Joining an Accountable Care Organization
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2018
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to examine the costs related to practice transformation from the perspective of primary care organizations transitioning to become participants in Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). We pose two research questions: 1) Will a Rural Health Clinic that participates in an Accountable Care Organization see higher or lower cost per visit, and 2) If the cost per visit is higher or lower, how large will that difference be? We analyze administrative data from a panel of over 800 Rural Health Clinics for the period 2007 - 2013 using a treatment effects approach, where a clinic's participation in an ACO is viewed as a "treatment." Since the first year that an RHC could join an ACO was 2012 and our most recent year of complete data is 2013, we restricted our analysis of the impact of participation in an ACO to include only 2012 and 2013 data. The estimates of the average treatment effect on the treated (ATET) pertain to only those RHCs that joined ACOs. The results show that those 20 sample ACO RHCs experienced an average from $15.00 to $18.61 higher cost per visit than the matching non-ACO RHCs. At this very early stage of ACO development, our results must be considered very preliminary at best. Whatever conclusions we draw from these results are intended to merely suggest what might be found once many more RHCs join ACOs. The conclusions we draw from this early analysis can lay a foundation for more analysis after data are available when more RHCs join ACOs.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, Healthcare Disparities
See topic collection
Reference Links: View the PubMed citation for Cost of Practice Transformation in Primary Care: Joining an Accountable Care Organization
2531
Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2018
Abstract: Financially supporting and sustaining behavioral health services integrated into primary care settings remains a major barrier to widespread implementation. Sustaining Healthcare Across Integrated Primary Care Efforts (SHAPE) was a demonstration project designed to prospectively examine the cost savings associated with utilizing an alternative payment methodology to support behavioral health services in primary care practices with integrated behavioral health services. Six primary care practices in Colorado participated in this project. Each practice had at least one on-site behavioral health clinician providing integrated behavioral health services. Three practices received non-fee-for-service payments (i.e., SHAPE payment) to support provision of behavioral health services for 18 months. Three practices did not receive the SHAPE payment and served as control practices for comparison purposes. Assignment to condition was nonrandom. Patient claims data were collected for 9 months before the start of the SHAPE demonstration project (pre-period) and for 18 months during the SHAPE project (post-period) to evaluate cost savings. During the 18-month post-period, analysis of the practices' claims data demonstrated that practices receiving the SHAPE payment generated approximately $1.08 million in net cost savings for their public payer population (i.e., Medicare, Medicaid, and Dual Eligible; N = 9,042). The cost savings were primarily achieved through reduction in downstream utilization (e.g., hospitalizations). The SHAPE demonstration project found that non-fee-for-service payments for behavioral health integrated into primary care may be associated with significant cost savings for public payers, which could have implications on future delivery and payment work in public programs (e.g., Medicaid).
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Cost savings associated with an alternative payment model for integrating behavioral health in primary care2532
Cost utility analysis of a collaborative stepped care intervention for panic and generalized anxiety disorders in primary care
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2014
Publication Place: England
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
2534
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a collaborative care programme for depression in primary care
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2014
Publication Place: Netherlands
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Cost-effectiveness analysis of a collaborative care programme for depression in primary care
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Cost-effectiveness analysis of a collaborative care programme for depression in primary care2536
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a rural telemedicine collaborative care intervention for depression
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2010
Publication Place: United States
Abstract: CONTEXT: Collaborative care interventions for depression in primary care settings are clinically beneficial and cost-effective. Most prior studies were conducted in urban settings. OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of a rural telemedicine-based collaborative care depression intervention. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial of intervention vs usual care. SETTING: Seven small (serving 1000 to 5000 veterans) Veterans Health Administration community-based outpatient clinics serving rural catchment areas in 3 mid-South states. Each site had interactive televideo dedicated to mental health but no psychiatrist or psychologist on site. Patients Among 18 306 primary care patients who were screened, 1260 (6.9%) screened positive for depression; 395 met eligibility criteria and were enrolled from April 2003 to September 2004. Of those enrolled, 360 (91.1%) completed a 6-month follow-up and 335 (84.8%) completed a 12-month follow-up. Intervention A stepped-care model for depression treatment was used by an off-site depression care team to make treatment recommendations via electronic medical record. The team included a nurse depression care manager, clinical pharmacist, and psychiatrist. The depression care manager communicated with patients via telephone and was supported by computerized decision support software. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The base case cost analysis included outpatient, pharmacy, and intervention expenditures. The effectiveness outcomes were depression-free days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) calculated using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey standard gamble conversion formula. RESULTS: The incremental depression-free days outcome was not significant (P = .10); therefore, further cost-effectiveness analyses were not done. The incremental QALY outcome was significant (P = .04) and the mean base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $85 634/QALY. Results adding inpatient costs were $111 999/QALY to $132 175/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: In rural settings, a telemedicine-based collaborative care intervention for depression is effective and expensive. The mean base case result was $85 634/QALY, which is greater than cost per QALY ratios reported for other, mostly urban, depression collaborative care interventions.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection
, HIT & Telehealth
See topic collection
, Healthcare Policy
See topic collection
Reference Links:
View the DOI record for Cost-effectiveness analysis of a rural telemedicine collaborative care intervention for depression
View DOI Record
View the PubMed citation for Cost-effectiveness analysis of a rural telemedicine collaborative care intervention for depression2538
Cost-effectiveness analysis of collaborative care management of major depression among low-income, predominantly Hispanics with diabetes
Type: Journal Article
Year: 2011
Abstract: Abstract. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care program among low-income Hispanics with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial of 387 patients with diabetes (96.5% Hispanic) with clinically significant depression followed over 18 months evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the Multifaceted Diabetes and Depression Program aimed at increasing patient exposure to evidence-based depression psychotherapy and/or pharmacotherapy in two public safety net clinics. Patient medical care costs and utilization were captured from Los Angeles County Department of Health Services claims records. Patient-reported outcomes included Short-Form Health Survey-12 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9-calculated depression-free days. RESULTS: Intervention patients had significantly greater Short-Form Health Survey-12 utility improvement from baseline compared with controls over the 18-month evaluation period (4.8%; P < 0.001) and a corresponding significant improvement in depression-free days (43.0; P < 0.001). Medical cost differences were not statistically significant in ordinary least squares and log-transformed cost regressions. The average costs of the Multifaceted Diabetes and Depression Program study intervention were $515 per patient. The program's cost-effectiveness averaged $4053 per quality-adjusted life-year per MDDP recipient and was more than 90% likely to fall below $12,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. CONCLUSIONS: Socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improved utility and quality of life in predominantly low-income Hispanic patients with diabetes and was highly cost-effective.
Topic(s):
Financing & Sustainability
See topic collection