State Legislators' Support for Behavioral Health Parity Laws: The Influence of Mutable and Fixed Factors at Multiple Levels.
Dissemination
behavioral health parity laws
legislators
Journal
The Milbank quarterly
ISSN: 1468-0009
Titre abrégé: Milbank Q
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8607003
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2019
Dec 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
12
11
2019
medline:
12
11
2019
entrez:
12
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Policy Points When communicating with state legislators, advocates for state behavioral health parity laws should emphasize that the laws do not increase insurance premiums. Legislators' opinions about the impacts of state behavioral health parity laws and the effectiveness of behavioral health treatment have more influence on support for the laws than do their political party affiliation or state-level contextual factors. Reducing legislators' stigma toward people with mental illness could increase their support for state behavioral health parity laws CONTEXT: Comprehensive state behavioral health parity legislation (C-SBHPL) is an evidence-based policy that improves access and adherence to behavioral health treatments. However, adoption of C-SBHPL by state legislators is low. Little is known about how C-SBHPL evidence might be most effectively disseminated to legislators or how legislators' fixed characteristics (eg, ideology), mutable characteristics (eg, beliefs about the policy's impact), and state-level contextual factors might influence their support for behavioral health policies. The purpose of our study is (1) to describe the associations between legislators' fixed and mutable characteristics, state-level contextual factors, and support for C-SBHPL; and (2) to identify the mutable characteristics of legislators independently associated with C-SBHPL support. We conducted a multimodal (post mail, email, telephone) survey of US state legislators in 2017 (N = 475). The dependent variable was strong support for C-SBHPL, and the independent variables included legislators' fixed and mutable characteristics and state-level contextual factors. We conducted multivariable, multilevel (legislator, state) logistic regression. Thirty-nine percent of the legislators strongly supported C-SBHPL. After adjustment, the strongest predictors of C-SBHPL support were beliefs that C-SBHPL increases access to behavioral health treatments (aOR = 5.85; 95% CI = 2.41, 14.20) and does not increase insurance premiums (aOR = 2.70; 95% CI = 1.24, 5.90). Stigma toward people with mental illness was inversely associated with support (aOR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.78, 0.95). After adjustment, ideology was the only fixed characteristic significantly associated with support for C-SBHPL. State-level contextual factors did not moderate associations between mutable characteristics and support for C-SBHPL. Legislators' mutable characteristics are stronger predictors of C-SBHPL support than are most of their fixed characteristics and all state-level contextual factors, and thus should be targeted by dissemination efforts.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31710152
doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12431
pmc: PMC6904266
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1200-1232Subventions
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R21MH111806
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2019 Milbank Memorial Fund.
Références
Purtle J, Brownson RC, Proctor EK. Infusing science into politics and policy: The importance of legislators as an audience in mental health policy dissemination research. Adm Policy Ment Health and Ment Health Serv Res. 2017;44(2):160-163.
Raghavan R, Bright CL, Shadoin AL. Toward a policy ecology of implementation of evidence-based practices in public mental health settings. Implementation Sci. 2008;3(1):26.
US Community Preventive Services Task Force. Recommendation for mental health benefits legislation. Am J Prev Med. 2015;48(6):767-770.
Jacob V, Qu S, Chattopadhyay S, et al. Legislations and policies to expand mental health and substance abuse benefits in health insurance plans: a community guide systematic economic review. J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2015;18(1):39.
Barry CL, Huskamp, HA. Moving beyond parity-mental health and addiction care under the ACA. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(11):973-975.
Barry CL, Goldman HH, Huskamp HA. Federal parity in the evolving mental health and addiction care landscape. Health Aff. 2016;35(6):1009-1016.
Frank RG. Realizing the promise of parity legislation for mental health. JAMA Psychiatry. 2017;74(2):117-118.
Kennedy Forum. Evaluating state mental health and addiction parity statutes: a technical report. 2018.
Barry CL, Huskamp HA, Goldman HH. A political history of federal mental health and addiction insurance parity. Milbank Q. 2010;88(3):404-433.
Stuart EA, McGinty EE, Kalb L, et al. Increased service use among children with autism spectrum disorder associated with mental health parity law. Health Aff. 2017;36(2):337-345.
Bendat M. In name only? Mental health parity or illusory reform. Psychodynamic Psychiatry. 2014;42(3):353-375.
DeLoss G, Ashpole L, Whelan K. Mental health parity and addiction equity act final rules: limited enforcement options don't overcome unequal treatment. J Health & Life Sci Law. 2014;7(3):73-105.
Heller BD. Revolutionizing the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008. Seton Hall Law Rev. 2016;47:569.
Berry KN, Huskamp HA, Goldman HH, Rutkow L, Barry CL. Litigation provides clues to ongoing challenges in implementing insurance parity. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2017;42(6):1065-1098.
Abelson R. Mental health treatment denied to customers by giant insurer's policies, judge rules. New York Times. March 5, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/05/health/unitedhealth-mental-health-parity.html. Accessed October 4, 2019.
Spatz I, Kolber M. The future of Essential Health Benefits Https. Health Affs Blog. February 14, 2017. https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20170214.058765/full/. Accessed October 4, 2019.
Barry CL, McGinty EE. Stigma and public support for parity and government spending on mental health: a 2013 national opinion survey. Psychiatr Serv. 2014;65(10):1265-1268.
Cauchi R, Hanson K. Mental health benefits: state laws mandating or regulating: National Conference of State Legislators. 2015. http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/mental-health-benefits-state-mandates.aspx. Accessed October 4, 2019.
Barry CL. The political evolution of mental health parity. Harvard Rev Psychiatry. 2006;14(4):185-194.
Peck MC, Scheffler RM. An analysis of the definitions of mental illness used in state parity laws. Psychiatr Serv. 2002;53(9):1089-1095.
Hernandez EM, Uggen C. Institutions, politics, and mental health parity. Society Ment Health. 2012;2(3):154-171.
Oliver K, Innvar S, Lorenc T, Woodman J, Thomas J. A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14(1):2.
Orton L, Lloyd-Williams F, Taylor-Robinson D, O'Flaherty M, Capewell S. The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review. PLOS ONE. 2011;6(7):e21704.
Innvaer S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A. Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Research & Policy. 2002;7(4):239-244.
Gollust SE, Seymour JW, Pany MJ, Goss A, Meisel ZF, Grande D. Mutual distrust: perspectives from researchers and policy makers on the research to policy gap in 2013 and recommendations for the future. INQUIRY. 2017;54:0046958017705465.
Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD. Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30(2):164-172.
Farrer L, Marinetti C, Cavaco YK, Costongs C. Advocacy for health equity: a synthesis review. Milbank Q. 2015;93(2):392-437.
Gollust SE, Lantz PM, Ubel PA. The polarizing effect of news media messages about the social determinants of health. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(12):2160-2167.
Niederdeppe J, Shapiro MA, Kim HK, Bartolo D, Porticella N. Narrative persuasion, causality, complex integration, and support for obesity policy. Health Commun. 2014;29(5):431-444.
Lee TK, Shapiro MA, Niederdeppe J. Deeper processing is associated with support for policies to reduce obesity. Health Commun. 2014;29(8):791-801.
Niederdeppe J, Roh S, Shapiro MA. Acknowledging individual responsibility while emphasizing social determinants in narratives to promote obesity-reducing public policy: a randomized experiment. PLOS ONE. 2015;10(2):e0117565.
Thibodeau PH, Perko VL, Flusberg SJ. The relationship between narrative classification of obesity and support for public policy interventions. Soc Sci & Med. 2015;141:27-35.
Ortiz SE, Zimmerman FJ, Adler GJ. Increasing public support for food-industry related, obesity prevention policies: the role of a taste-engineering frame and contextualized values. Soc Sci & Med. 2016;156:142-153.
Barry CL, Brescoll VL, Brownell KD, Schlesinger M. Obesity metaphors: how beliefs about the causes of obesity affect support for public policy. Milbank Q. 2009;87(1):7-47.
Kennedy-Hendricks A, Barry CL, Gollust SE, Ensminger ME, Chisolm MS, McGinty EE. Social stigma toward persons with prescription opioid use disorder: associations with public support for punitive and public health-oriented policies. Psychiatr Serv. 2017:appi. ps. 201600056.
Carpiano RM, Fitz NS. Public attitudes toward child undervaccination: a randomized experiment on evaluations, stigmatizing orientations, and support for policies. Soc Sci & Med. 2017.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Using Science as Evidence in Public Policy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.
Olson S. The Science of Science Communication III: Inspiring Novel Collaborations and Building Capacity: Proceedings of a Colloquium. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2018.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Ending Discrimination Against People with Mental and Substance Use Disorders: The Evidence for Stigma Change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2016.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2017.
Williamson A, Makkar SR, McGrath C, Redman S. How can the use of evidence in mental health policy be increased? A systematic review. Psychiatr Serv. 2015;66(8):783-797.
Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK. Dissemination and Implementation Research in Health: Translating Science to Practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2012.
Purtle J, Peters R, Brownson RC. A review of policy dissemination and implementation research funded by the National Institutes of Health, 2007-2014. Implementation Sci. 2016;11(1):1.
Aarons GA, Hurlburt M, Horwitz SM. Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res. 2011;38(1):4-23.
Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, Kirsh SR, Alexander JA, Lowery JC. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Sci. 2009;4(1):50.
Niederdeppe J, Roh S, Dreisbach C. How narrative focus and a statistical map shape health policy support among state legislators. Health Commun. 2016;31(2):242-255.
Welch PJ, Dake JA, Price JH, Thompson AJ, Ubokudom SE. State legislators’ support for evidence-based obesity reduction policies. Prev Med. 2012;55(5):427-429.
Cohen JE, Nicole A, Ashley MJ, Ferrence R, Northrup DA, Studlar DT. Predictors of Canadian legislators’ support for tobacco control policies. Soc Sci & Med. 2002;55(6):1069-1076.
de Guia NA, Cohen J, Ashley MJ, et al. Dimensions underlying legislator support for tobacco control policies. Tobacco Control. 2003;12(2):133-139.
de Guia NA, Cohen JE, Ashley MJ, Ferrence R, Northrup DA, Pollard JS. How provincial and territorial legislators view tobacco and tobacco control: findings from a Canadian study. Chronic Dis Can. 1998;19:57-61.
Goldstein AO, Cohen JE, Flynn BS, et al. State legislators’ attitudes and voting intentions toward tobacco control legislation. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(7):1197-1200.
Payton E, Thompson A, Price JH, Sheu J-J, Dake JA. African American legislators’ perceptions of firearm violence prevention legislation. J Community Health. 2015;40(3):439-447.
Flynn BS, Goldstein AO, Solomon LJ, et al. Predictors of state legislators’ intentions to vote for cigarette tax increases. Prev Med. 1998;27(2):157-165.
Haidt J. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 2012.
Purtle J, Lê-Scherban F, Shattuck P, Proctor EK, Brownson RC. An audience research study to disseminate evidence about comprehensive state mental health parity legislation to US state policymakers: protocol. Implementation Sci. 2017;12(1):81.
Fisher SH, Herrick R. Old versus new: the comparative efficiency of mail and internet surveys of state legislators. State Polit Policy Q. 2013;13(2):147-163.
Pagel C, Bates DW, Goldmann D, Koller CF. A way forward for bipartisan health reform? Democrat and Republican state legislator priorities for the goals of health policy. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(10):1601-1603.
Zhu JM, Chhabra M, Grande D. Concise research report: the future of Medicaid: state legislator views on policy waivers. J Gen Intern Med. 2018:1-3.
Holt D, Elliot D. Methods of weighting for unit non-response. The Statistician. 1991:333-342.
Purtle J, Dodson EA, Nelson K, Meisel ZF, Brownson RC. Legislators’ sources of behavioral health research and preferences for dissemination: variations by political party. Psychiatr Serv. 2018:appi. ps. 201800153.
Purtle J, Lê-Scherban F, Wang X, Shattuck PT, Proctor EK, Brownson RC. Audience segmentation to disseminate behavioral health evidence to legislators: an empirical clustering analysis. Implementation Sci. 2018;13(1):121.
Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Quality Life Res. 2003;12(3):229-238.
Sipe TA, Finnie RK, Knopf JA, et al. Effects of mental health benefits legislation: a community guide systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2015;48(6):755-766.
McGinty E, Pescosolido B, Kennedy-Hendricks A, Barry CL. Communication strategies to counter stigma and improve mental illness and substance use disorder policy. Psychiatr Serv. 2017:appi. ps. 201700076.
Corrigan PW, Watson AC. Factors that explain how policy makers distribute resources to mental health services. Psychiatr Serv. 2003;54(4):501-507.
Frank RG, Koyanagi C, McGuire TG. The politics and economics of mental health “parity” laws. Health Aff. 1997;16(4):108-119.
Frank RG, Glied SA. Better but Not Well: Mental Health Policy in the United States Since 1950. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2006.
Metzl JM, MacLeish KT. Mental illness, mass shootings, and the politics of American firearms. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(2):240-249.
American National Election Studies. Guide to public opinion and electoral behavior. Liberal-conservative self-identification 1972-2012. https://electionstudies.org/resources/anes-guide/top-tables/?id=29. Accessed October 16, 2019.
Brownson RC, Dodson EA, Stamatakis KA, et al. Communicating evidence-based information on cancer prevention to state-level policy makers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Association of County Behavioral Health & Developmental Disability Directors, National Institute of Mental Health, Carter Center Mental Health Program. Attitudes Toward Mental Illness: Results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2012.
Barry CL, McGinty EE, Vernick JS, Webster DW. After Newtown-public opinion on gun policy and mental illness. New Engl J M. 2013;368(12):1077-1081.
Saad L. Americans fault mental health system most for gun violence. Gallup Politics. 2013;20.
Wilson LC, Ballman AD, Buczek TJ. News content about mass shootings and attitudes toward mental illness. Journalism & Mass Commun Q. 2016;93(3):644-658.
Mother Jones. A guide to mass shootings in America. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/. Accessed October 16, 2019.
Kaiser Family Foundation. Opioid overdose death rates and all drug overdose death rates per 100,000 population (age-adjusted). https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/opioid-overdose-death-rates/. Accessed October, 15, 2019.
National Conference of State Legislatures. Partisan composition during the 2017 legislative session. http://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/partisan-composition.aspx#2017. Accessed October, 15, 2019.
US Department of Labor. Local area unemployment statistics. 2017. https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm. Accessed October 15, 2019.
Buchmueller TC, Cooper PF, Jacobson M, Zuvekas SH. Parity for whom? Exemptions and the extent of state mental health parity legislation. Health Aff. 2007; 26(4):w483-w487.
US Department of Labor. Report to Congress: Annual report on self-insured group health plans March 2018. Appendix B. https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/ebsa/researchers/statistics/retirement-bulletins/annual-report-on-self-insured-group-health-plans-2018-appendix-b.pdf. Accessed October 4, 2019.
McGinty EE, Goldman HH, Pescosolido BA, Barry CL. Communicating about mental illness and violence: balancing stigma and increased support for services. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2018;April 1;43(2):185-228.
Purtle J, Dodson EA, Brownson RC. Uses of research evidence by state legislators who prioritize behavioral health issues. Psychiatr Serv. 2016;67(12):1355-1361.
Bogenschneider K, Corbett TJ. Evidence-Based Policymaking: Insights from Policy-Minded Researchers and Research-Minded Policymakers. New York, NY: Routledge; 2011.
Hird JA. Power, Knowledge, and Politics: Policy Analysis in the States. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2005.
Purtle J, Dodson, E, Brownson R. Political party, ideology, and variations in research dissemination preferences and research use practices among US state legislators. Implementation Sci. 2018;13(Suppl. 3):A39.
Stone EM, McGinty EE. Public willingness to pay to improve services for individuals with serious mental illness. Psychiatr. Serv. 2018:appi. ps. 201800043.
Schneider A, Ingram H. Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. Am Polit Sci Rev. 1993;87(2):334-347.
Schneider AL, Ingram HM, Ingram HM. Deserving and Entitled: Social Constructions and Public Policy. Albany, NY: SUNY Press; 2005.
Gronholm PC, Henderson C, Deb T, Thornicroft G. Interventions to reduce discrimination and stigma: the state of the art. Social Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2017;52(3):249-258.
Kingdon JW, Thurber JA. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Vol. 45. Boston, MA: Little, Brown; 1984.
Barry CL, McGinty EE, Pescosolido BA, Goldman HH. Stigma, discrimination, treatment effectiveness, and policy: public views about drug addiction and mental illness. Psychiatr Serv. 2014;65(10):1269-1272.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Increases in drug and opioid-involved overdose deaths-United States, 2010-2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 2016;65(50-51);1445-1452.