Article

Robbing Peter to pay Paul: did New York State's outpatient commitment program crowd out voluntary service recipients?

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Box 3071, Durham, NC 27701, USA.
Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) (Impact Factor: 1.99). 10/2010; 61(10):988-95. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.61.10.988
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study examined whether New York State's assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) program disadvantaged voluntary service recipients by directing services toward court-ordered individuals.
Administrative data from the New York State Office of Mental Health were linked with Medicaid claims from 1999 through 2007 to compare trends in utilization of enhanced outpatient services by involuntary and voluntary service recipients with serious mental illness. Multivariable time series analysis was used to examine the likelihood that voluntary care seekers (N=3,295) either did not initiate or did not receive assertive community treatment or intensive case management during any month as a function of the number of AOT orders in the system.
New York State appropriated new resources for enhanced community-based mental health services to implement AOT. During the first three years of the AOT program, most of the expansion in enhanced services was directed toward individuals under court-ordered treatment, which appears to have affected voluntary care seekers by lowering their odds of initiating enhanced services and raising their odds of having these services discontinued or no longer receiving them. However, after the first three years of AOT, enhanced service provision expanded steadily among both voluntary and involuntary recipients.
In tandem with New York's AOT program, enhanced services increased among involuntary recipients, whereas no corresponding increase was initially seen for voluntary recipients. In the long run, however, overall service capacity was increased, and the focus on enhanced services for AOT participants appears to have led to greater access to enhanced services for both voluntary and involuntary recipients.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Christine M Wilder, Feb 17, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
132 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No one who attended the 2010 national public health law conference hosted by the Public Health Law Association (PHLA) and the American Society of Law, Medicine, and Ethics (ASLME) could miss the sense of excitement and momentum. The revival of this annual public health law meeting, with the support of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), the energetic leadership of the PHLA president and board, ASLME’s expert guidance, and a rousing address by Dr. Tom Frieden, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), symbolize the continued commitment of a wide range of important individuals and institutions to the proposition that law is of substantial importance to public health. There is more than just symbolism to be excited about. RWJF has made a dramatic and farsighted commitment to building the field with an integrated program of support for the effective use of law in public health. This includes investments in exemplary programs like the Public Health Institute, the National Policy and Legal Analysis Network, Healthy Eating Research and Active Living Research, and the Public Health Law Network. This paper introduces the Public Health Law Research (PHLR) Program, another integral part of RWJF’s vision for improving public health through law. Public health law research, the scientific study of the relation of law and legal practices to population health, builds the evidence base for public health law. This paper describes PHLR’s work in funding research and helping strengthen the quality and rigor of public health law research. It also discusses how this approach fits within the larger RWJF effort to put law to work in practice by working as allies with a wide community of health agencies and organizations.
    The Journal of Law Medicine &amp Ethics 03/2011; 39 Suppl 1(1):15-20. DOI:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00558.x · 0.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment adherence and nonadherence is the current paradigm for understanding why people with serious mental illnesses have low rates of participation in many evidence-based practices. The authors propose the concept of self-determination as an evolution in this explanatory paradigm. A review of the research literature led them to the conclusion that notions of adherence are significantly limited, promoting a value-based perspective suggesting people who do not opt for prescribed treatments are somehow flawed or otherwise symptomatic. Consistent with a trend in public health and health psychology, ideas of decisions and behavior related to health and wellness are promoted. Self-determination frames these decisions as choices and is described herein via the evolution of ideas from resistance and compliance to collaboration and engagement. Developments in recovery and hope-based mental health systems have shepherded interest in self-determination. Two ways to promote self-determination are proffered: aiding the rational actor through approaches such as shared decision making and addressing environmental forces that are barriers to choice. Although significant progress has been made toward self-determination, important hurdles remain.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 02/2012; 63(2):169-73. DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.201100065 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since 2006, California's Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) has distributed an estimated $6 billion in new tax revenues to county mental health systems. Although evaluations of MHSA's effectiveness find favorable outcomes among high-risk individuals that represent 6% of all mental health clients, scant research has tested whether MHSA funds improve the overall functioning of the public mental health system. The authors analyzed whether the incidence of voluntary emergency psychiatric visits, a key gauge of the functioning of the mental health system, fell below expected levels after the disbursement of MHSA funds. Los Angeles County, the most populous county in California, was examined. The authors obtained the monthly incidence of emergency psychiatric visits among Medi-Cal patients for 96 months spanning July 2000 to June 2008 (5.9 million overall admissions, of which 47,328 were emergency visits). Time-series methods controlled for temporal patterns in emergency visits as well as other potential confounders (unemployment, for example) that could induce spurious associations. The incidence of voluntary psychiatric emergencies fell below expected levels eight to 12 months after the disbursement of MHSA funds. After one year, emergency visits returned to their long-term mean level. Results remained robust after analyses controlled for outliers and potential confounders. In the short term, an infusion of public funds devoted to mental health services appeared to reduce psychiatric emergency visits. Explanations for the transient nature of the decline in emergency visits in Los Angeles County are discussed.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 06/2012; 63(8):808-14. DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.201100372 · 1.99 Impact Factor