Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managed care and outpatient substance abuse treatment intensity

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

Abstract

This study examines the extent to which managed care behavioral controls are associated with treatment intensity in outpatient substance abuse treatment facilities. Data are from the 1995 National Drug Abuse Treatment System Survey, a nationally representative survey that includes over 600 provider organizations with a response rate of 86%. Treatment intensity is measured in three ways: (1) the number of months clients spend in outpatient drug treatment, (2) the number of individual treatment sessions clients receive over the course of treatment, and (3) the number of group treatment sessions clients receive over the course of treatment. After accounting for selection bias and controlling for market, organization, and client characteristics, there is no significant relationship between the scope of managed care oversight and treatment intensity. However, the stringency of managed care oversight activities is negatively associated with the number of individual and group treatment sessions received over the course of treatment.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mechanic D, Schlesinger M, McAlpine DD. Management of mental health and substance abuse services: state of the art and early results.The Milbank Quarterly. 1995;73(1):19–55.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wells KB, Astrachan BM, Tischler GL, et al. Issues and approaches in evaluating managed mental health care.The Milbank Quarterly. 1995;73(1):57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Findlay S. Managed behavioral health care in 1999: an industry at a crossroads.Health Affairs. 1999;18(5):116–124.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Manderscheid RW, Henderson MJ.Speaking with a Common Language: The Past, Present and Future of Data Standards for Managed Behavioral Healthcare. Rockville, MD: Center for Mental Health Services, Division of State and Community Systems Development; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Mechanic D, McAlpine DD. Mission unfulfilled: potholes on the road to mental health parity.Health Affairs. 1999;18(5):7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  6. McLellan AT, Woody GE, Metzger D, et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of addiction treatment: reasonable expectations, appropriate comparisons. In: Egerton JA, Fox DM, Leshner AI, eds.Treating Drug Abusers Effectively. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bell DC, Richard AJ, Feltz LC. Mediators of drug treatment outcomes.Addictive Behaviors. 1996;21(5):597–613.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ershoff D, Radcliffe A, Gregory M. The southern California Kaiser-Permanente chemical dependency recovery program evaluation: results of a treatment outcome study in an HMO setting.Journal of Addictive Diseases. 1996;15(3):1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hoffmann NG, Miller NS. Treatment outcomes for abstinence-based programs.Psychiatric Annals. 1992;22(8):402–408.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hubbard RL, Marsden ME, Rachal JV.Drug Abuse Treatment: A National Study of Effectiveness. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  11. McKay JR, Alterman AI, McLellan AT, et al. Treatment goals, continuity of care and outcomes in a day hospital substance abuse rehabilitation program.American Journal of Psychiatry. 1994;151(2):254–259.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Moos RH, Finney JW, Cronkite RC.Alcoholism Treatment: Content, Process, and Outcome. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Simpson DD. Effectiveness of drug-abuse treatment: a review of research from field settings. In: Egerton JA, Fox DM, Leshner AI, eds.Treating Drug Abuse Effectively. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Campbell J, Gabrielli W, Laster LJ, et al. Efficacy of outpatient intensive treatment for drug abuse.Journal of Addictive Diseases. 1997;16(2):15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Higgins ST, Budney AJ, Bickel WK, et al. Participation of significant others in outpatient behavioral treatment predicts greater cocaine abstinence.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1993;20(1):47–56.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hoffman JA, Caudill BD, Koman JJ III, et al. Comparative cocaine abuse treatment strategies: enhancing client retention and treatment exposure.Journal of Addictive Diseases. 1994;13(4):115–128.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kang S, Kleinman PH, Woody GE. Outcomes for cocaine abusers after once-a-week psychosocial therapy.The American Journal of Psychiatry. 1991;148:630–635.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Simpson DD, Joe GW, Rowan-Szal G, et al. Client engagement and change during drug abuse treatment.Journal of Substance Abuse. 1995;7(1):117–134.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Edmunds M, Frank R, Hogan M, et al., eds.Managing Managed Care: Quality Improvements in Behavioral Health. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Beinecke RH, Goodman M, Lockhart A. The impact of managed care on Massachusetts mental health and substance abuse providers.Administration in Social Work. 1997;21(2):41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  21. French MT, Dunlap LJ, Galinis BA, et al. Health care reforms and managed care for substance abuse services: findings from eleven case studies.Journal of Public Health Policy. 1996;17(2):181–203.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Miller WR. The effectiveness of treatment for substance abuse: reasons for optimism.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1992;9:93–102.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Alexander JA, Lemak CH. Managed care penetration in outpatient substance abuse treatment units.Medical Care Research and Review. 1997;54(4):490–507.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Alexander JA, Lemak CH. Directors' perceptions of the effects of managed care on outpatient substance abuse treatment.Journal of Substance Abuse. 1997;9:1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Alexander JA, Lemak CH. The effects of managed care on administrative burden in outpatient substance abuse treatment facilities.Medical Care. 1997;35(10):1060–1068.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Alexander JA, Wheeler JRC, Nahra T, et al. Managed care and technical efficiency in outpatient substance abuse treatment units.Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research. 1998;25(4):377–396.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Overview of the National Drug and Alcohol Treatment Unit Survey (NDATUS): 1992 and 1980–1992. Advance Report No. 9. Rockville, MD: Author; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pfeffer J, Salancik G.The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hasenfeld YE.The Organization of Human Services: Structure and Processes. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  30. D'Aunno T, Sutton RI, Price RH. Isomorphism and external support in conflicting institutional environments: a study of drug abuse treatment units.Academy of Management Journal. 1991;34(3):636–661.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Flynn DM. Sponsorship and the survival of new organizations.Journal of Small Business Management. January 1993:51–62.

  32. Oliver C. Strategic responses to institutional processes.Academy of Management Review. 1991;16(1):145–179.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wheeler JRC, Fadel H, D'Aunno TA. Ownership and performance of outpatient substance abuse treatment centers.American Journal of Public Health. 1992;82(5):711–718.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Etheridge R, Hubbard RL, Anderson J, et al. Treatment structure and program services in the Drug Abuse Treatment Outcome Study (DATOS).Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 1997;11(4):244–260.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Simpson DD, Savage LJ, Lloyd MR. Follow-up evaluation of treatment of drug abuse during 1969 to 1972.Archives of General Psychiatry. 1979;36:772–780.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Simpson DD. Treatment for drug abuse: follow-up outcomes and length of time spent.Archives of General Psychiatry. 1981;38:875–880.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Alemi F, Stephens RC, Llorens S, et al. A review of factors affecting treatment outcomes: expected treatment outcome scale.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1995;21(4):483–509.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Joe GW, Simpson DD, Sells SB. Treatment process and relapse to opioid use during methadone maintenance.American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 1992;19:124–130.

    Google Scholar 

  39. McLellan AT, Alterman AI, Metzger DS, et al.. Similarity of outcome predictors across opiate, cocaine, and alcohol treatments: role of treatment services.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1994;62(6):1141–1158.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ornstein P, Cherapon JA. Demographic variables as predictors of alcoholism treatment outcome.Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1985;46(5):425–432.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Groves RL.Telephone Survey Methodology. New York: Wiley; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  42. D'Aunno T, Vaughn TE, McElroy P. An institutional analysis of HIV prevention efforts by the nation's outpatient substance abuse treatment units.Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1999;40:175–192.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Batten HL, Prottas JM, Horgan CM, et al, eds.Drug Services Research Survey, Final Report: Phase II. Waltham, MA: Institute for Health Policy, Brandeis University; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Shwartz M, Mulvey KP, Woods D, et al. Length of stay as an outcome in an era of managed care: an empirical study.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment. 1997;14(1):11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Heckman JJ. Sample selection bias as a specification error.Econometrica. 1979;47:153–161.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Breen R.Regression Models: Censored, Sample-Selected, or Truncated Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lemak CH, Alexander JA, D'Aunno TA. Organizational analysis of selective contracting in managed care: the case of substance abuse treatment. Working paper, 1999.

  48. Goldman W, McCulloch J, Cuffel B, et al. More evidence for the insurability of managed behavioral health care.Health Affairs. 1999;18(5):172–181.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Nurco DN, Kinlock TW, Hanlon TE. The nature and status of drug abuse treatment.Maryland Medical Journal. 1994;43(1):51–57.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Wheeler JRC, Nahra TA. Private and public ownership in behavioral health care: do we have a two-tiered system?Administration and Policy in Mental Health. 2000;27(4):197–209.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Services Administration, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100195, 32610-0195, Gainesville, FL

    Christy Harris Lemak PhD (Assistant Professor)

  2. the Department of Health Management and Policy, the University of Michigan, USA

    Jeffrey A. Alexander PhD (Richard Carl Jelenik Professor)

Authors
  1. Christy Harris Lemak PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey A. Alexander PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christy Harris Lemak PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lemak, C.H., Alexander, J.A. Managed care and outpatient substance abuse treatment intensity. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research 28, 12–29 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287231

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02287231

Keywords

Search

Navigation