Equity in private insurance coverage for substance abuse: a perspective on parity.

Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Health Affairs (Impact Factor: 4.64). 11/2007; 26(6):w706-16. DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.26.6.w706
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Congress is considering enactment of comprehensive parity legislation. The intent of parity is to equalize private coverage of behavioral and general medical care, thereby improving efficiency and fairness in insurance markets. One issue is whether to extend parity to substance abuse (SA) benefits. In the past, inclusion of substance abuse has been a hurdle to passage of parity. We examine the politics of SA parity, compare coverage trends for substance abuse and mental health, and assess the rationale for equalizing benefits. We conclude that the justification for SA parity is as compelling as it is for mental health parity.


Available from: Jody Sindelar, Jan 19, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: In 2008, the US Congress enacted the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) requiring insurers to equalize private insurance coverage for mental health and substance use disorder services with coverage for general medical services. Objective: To examine the effects of MHPAEA on substance use disorder treatment. Study Design: We used a difference-in-differences design to compare changes in outcomes among plan enrollees in the years before and after implementation of federal parity (2009-2010) with changes in outcomes among a comparison group of enrollees previously covered by state substance use disorder parity laws. Methods: Insurance claims data from Aetna Inc health plans in 10 states with state parity laws were used to compare outcomes for plan enrollees in fully insured and self-insured health plans (N = 298,339). Results: In the first year of implementation, we found that federal parity did not lead to changes in the proportion of enrollees using substance use disorder treatment. We did find a modest increase in spending on substance use disorder treatment per enrollee ($9.99, 95% confidence interval, 2.54-18.21), but no significant change in identification, treatment initiation, or treatment engagement. Conclusions: Inclusion of substance use disorder services in the federal parity law did not result in substantial increases in health plan spending. It will be critical to study results for year 2 after regulations affecting the management of care (eg, utilization review, network access) take effect.
    The American journal of managed care 01/2014; 20(1):76-82. · 2.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE This study assessed the impact of Oregon's 2007 parity law, which required behavioral health insurance parity, on rates of follow-up care provided within 30 days of psychiatric inpatient care. METHODS Data sources were claims (2005-2008) for 737 individuals with inpatient stays for a mental disorder who were continuously enrolled in insurance plans affected by the parity law (intervention group) or in commercial, self-insured plans that were not affected by the law (control group). A difference-in-difference analysis was used to compare rates of follow-up care before and after the parity law between discharges of individuals in the intervention group and the control group and between discharges of individuals in the intervention group who had or had not met preparity quantitative coverage limits during a coverage year. Estimates of the marginal effects of the parity law were adjusted for gender, discharge diagnosis, relationship to policy holder, and calendar quarter of discharge. RESULTS The study included 353 discharges in the intervention group and 535 discharges in the control group. After the parity law, follow-up rates increased by 11% (p=.042) overall and by 20% for discharges of individuals who had met coverage limits (p=.028). CONCLUSIONS The Oregon parity law was associated with a large increase in the rate of follow-up care, predominantly for discharges of individuals who had met preparity quantitative coverage limits. Given similarities between the law and the 2008 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, the results may portend a national effect of more comprehensive parity laws.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 06/2013; 64(10). DOI:10.1176/ · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigated the association between substance use parity laws and the detection/treatment of co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders among adolescents seeking treatment within a mental health setting. Data were drawn from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 1997 Client/Patient Sample Survey (CPSS). The CPSS is a nationally representative survey of mental health service use obtained from standardized chart reviews. While 5.8% of the sample received a substance use diagnosis, only 32% of those youth received substance treatment. Youth receiving services in a state with a substance parity law were more likely to receive a substance use diagnosis and substance treatment compared with youth residing in a state without a substance parity law. Findings suggest that while substance parity laws may influence the detection and treatment of substance use disorders, overall, youth with a dual diagnosis remain underserved.
    Journal of Dual Diagnosis 01/2009; 5(1-1):2-13. DOI:10.1080/15504260802628544 · 0.80 Impact Factor