Skip to main content
Log in

Outcomes for medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia under a prepaid mental health carve-out

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examines the impact of a mental health carve-out program in Utah on mental health status of Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Three community mental health centers contracted to provide mental health care for all Medicaid beneficiaries in their service areas under managed care arrangements, while beneficiaries in the remainder of the state remained under traditional Medicaid. A pre-post evaluation was utilized, with a contemporaneous control group of Utah Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia under traditional Medicaid. From 1991 to 1994, the average beneficiary's mental health status improved, but the improvement was less under the carve-out program than under traditional fee-for-service Medicaid. The difference was the greatest for beneficiaries with the worst mental health status at baseline, with effects growing over time. Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia experienced less improvement in mental health status under a carve-out arrangement for mental health care compared to what would have happened under traditional Medicaid.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Mechanic D, Schlesinger A, McApline D: Management of mental health and substance abuse services: State of the art and early results.Milbank Quarterly 1995; 73:19–55.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Goldman W, McCulloch J, Sturm R: Costs and use of mental health services before and after managed care.Health Affairs 1998; 17:40–52.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ma A, McGuire T: Costs and incentives in a behavioral health carve-out.Health Affairs 1998; 17(2):53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Essock S, Goldman H: States' embrace of managed mental health care.Health Affairs 1995; 14:35–44.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Koyanagi C:Mental Health Managed Care: Survey of the States. Washington, DC: Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Leadholm B, Kerznei J: Implementing a system of public managd care: The Massachusetts experience.Behavioral Health Care Tomorrow 1993; July/August:36–38.

  7. Micali P, Naideni C: Merit Behavioral Care in Iowa: A case study.Behavioral Health Management 1996; 16:5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dickey B, Norton E, Normand S, et al.: Massachusetts Medicaid managed health care reform: Treatment of the psychiatrically disabled. In: Scheffler R, Rossiter L, Cantor J (Eds.):Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research 1995; 15:99–116.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Callahan J, Shepard D, Beinecke R, et al.: Mental health/substance abuse treatment in managed care: The Massachusetts Medicaid experience.Health Affairs 1995; 14:173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dickey B, Normand S, Norton E, et al.: Managing the care of schizophrenia.Archives of General Psychiatry 1996; 53(10):945–952.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Babigan A, Mitchell O, Marshall P, et al.: A mental health capitation experiment: Evaluating the Monroe Livingston experience. In: Frank R, Manning W (Eds.):Economics and Mental Health. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dwyer D, Mitchell O, Cole R, et al.:Evaluating Mental Health Capitation Treatment: Lessons from Panel Data. Working Paper 5297. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Reid S, Hennessy K, Mitchell O, et al.: A mental health capitation program II: Cost benefit analysis.Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1994; 45:1097–1103.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Houseman J, Wallace N, Bloom J: Managed mental health experience in Colorado. In: Mechanic D (Ed.):Managed Behavioral Health Care: Current Realities and Future Potential. New Directions for Mental Health Services No. 78. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dangerfield D, Betet R: Managed mental health care in the public sector. In: Goldman W, Feldman S (Eds.):Managed Mental Health Care. New Directions for Mental Health Services No. 59. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Christianson JB, Gray DZ, Kihlstrom LC, et al.: Development of the Utah Prepaid Mental Health Plan.Advances in Health Economics and Health Research 1995; 15:117–135.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Christianson J, Manning W, Lurie N, et al.: Utah's prepaid mental health plan: The first year.Health Affairs 1995; 14:160–172.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stoner T, Manning W, Christianson J, et al.: Expenditures for mental health services in the Utah Prepaid Mental Health Plan.Health Care Financing Review 1997; 18:73–93.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lurie N, Moscovice I, Popkin M, et al.: Accuracy of Medicaid claims for psychiatric diagnoses: Experience with the diagnosis of schizophrenia.Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1992; 43:69–71.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Liu C, Manning W, Christianson J, et al.: Patterns of outpatient use of mental health services for Medicaid beneficiaries under a prepaid mental health carve-out.Administration and Policy in Mental Health. In press.

  21. Popin M, Callies A, Luri N, et al.: An instrument to evaluate the process of psychiatric care in ambulatory settings.Psychiatric Services 1997; 48:524–527.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Popkin M, Lurie L, Manning W, et al.: Changes in the process of care for Medicaid patients with schizophrenia in Utah's prepaid mental health plan.Psychiatric Services 1998; 49(4):518–523.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Endicott J, Spitzer RL, Fleiss J, et al.: The Global Assessment Scale: A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance.Archives of General Psychiatry 1976; 33:766–771.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Overall JE, Gorham DR: The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale.Psychological Report 1962; 10:799–812.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Davies AR, Ware JE:Measuring Health Perceptions: The RAND Health Insurance Experiment. R-2711-HHS. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Huber PJ: The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under non-standard conditions.Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium in Mathematical Statistics and Probability 1965; 1:221–233.

    Google Scholar 

  27. STATA Reference Manual: Release 4. College Station, TX: Stata, 1994.

  28. Harman JS, Manning WG, Lurie N:Interpreting Clinical and Policy Significance in Mental Health Services Research. Unpublished manuscript, 1996.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Willard G. Manning Ph.D..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manning, W.G., Liu, CF., Stoner, T.J. et al. Outcomes for medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia under a prepaid mental health carve-out. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 26, 442–450 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287304

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287304

Keywords

Navigation