Faculty Bibliography

People with substance use disorder (SUD) smoke cigarettes at a rate more than twice that of the general population. Policies and programs have focused on promoting smoking cessation among people with SUD, yet it is unclear whether interventions have adequately reached the subgroup involved in the criminal legal system, who have among the highest smoking rates. Drawing on repeated cross-sections of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we found that smoking rates declined by 9.4 percentage points overall among people with SUD from 2010 to 2019, but rates remained virtually unchanged among the subgroup with criminal legal involvement. In regression analyses focused on people with SUD, three-quarters of the excess smoking burden for those with criminal legal involvement at baseline (2010-13) was accounted for by controlling for sociodemographics, substance use type, health insurance, and recent SUD treatment. However, even after we controlled for these same factors, the disparity in smoking prevalence among people with SUD between those with and without criminal legal involvement remained constant over time. These findings underscore the need for smoking cessation interventions focused on the criminal legal system, including correctional facilities and SUD treatment programs that serve people in this population.

AIMS:To estimate recent trends in cigarette use and health insurance coverage for United States adults with and without mental health and substance use disorders (MH/SUD). DESIGN:Event study analysis of smoking and insurance coverage trends among US adults with and without MH/SUD using 2008-19 public use data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, an annual, cross-sectional survey. SETTING:USA. PARTICIPANTS:A nationally representative sample of non-institutionalized respondents aged 18-64 years (n = 448 762). MEASUREMENTS:Outcome variables were three measures of recent cigarette use and one measure of past-year health insurance coverage. We compared outcomes between people with and without MH/SUD (MH disorder: past-year mental illness, predicted from Kessler-6 and the World Health Organization-Disability Assessment Schedule impairment scale; SUD: met survey-based DSM-IV criteria for past-year alcohol, cannabis, cocaine or heroin use disorder) and over time. FINDINGS:Comparing pooled data from 2008 to 2009 and from 2018 to 2019, current smoking rates of adults with MH/SUD decreased from 37.9 to 27.9% while current smoking rates of adults without MH/SUD decreased from 21.4 to 16.3%, a significant difference in decrease of 4.9 percentage points (pts) [95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.3-6.6 pts]. Daily smoking followed similar patterns (difference in decrease of 3.9 pts (95% CI = 2.3-5.4 pts). Recent smoking abstinence rates for adults with MH/SUD increased from 7.4 to 10.9%, while recent smoking abstinence rates for adults without MH/SUD increased from 9.6 to 12.0%, a difference in increase of 1.0 pts (95% CI = -3.0 to 0.9 pts). In 2018-19, 11% of net reductions in current smoking, 12% of net reductions in daily smoking and 12% of net increases in recent smoking abstinence coincided with greater gains in insurance coverage for adults with MH/SUD compared to those without MH/SUD. CONCLUSIONS:Improvements in smoking and abstinence outcomes for US adults with mental health and substance use disorders appear to be associated with increases in health insurance coverage.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Discrimination is experienced across demographic attributes (e.g., race and gender) and vantage points (e.g., personal and vicarious), yet few studies have classified these different experiences of discrimination within healthcare systems. Moreover, which discriminatory experiences have greater influence on patient-reported quality outcomes remains poorly understood. To address these gaps, we used latent class analysis (LCA) to identify typologies of past experiences with healthcare discrimination among adults with depression-who experience more frequent and stigmatizing healthcare interactions than the general population-and assess the relationship between class membership and current ratings of patient-reported quality outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We surveyed a nationally representative sample of adults with depression (n = 803) to assess past experiences of discrimination by medical providers in terms of both the characteristics targeted for discrimination and whether healthcare discrimination was experienced personally or by friends and family members. We conducted an LCA to identify discrimination-exposure classes and a modified Poisson regression to identify associations between class membership and patient-reported quality outcomes (e.g., overall medical provider quality, respect, clear communication, and careful listening), while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:We identified four latent classes of healthcare discrimination: low discrimination (LD; referent class: 72.2% of total sample), vicarious linguistic discrimination (VL; 13.9%), elevated personal and vicarious racial discrimination (EPVR; 10.5%), and high racial/ethnic discrimination (HRE; 3.4%). Compared to those in the LD class, individuals in the EPVR class had higher rates of reporting their current medical provider's respect and careful listening skills as sometimes or never, (Respect aIRR: 1.90, 95% CI: 1.05-3.42; Listening aIRR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.29-3.66). Those in the HRE class reported higher rates of reporting their medical provider's quality and communication as poor or fair and lower ratings of careful listening (Quality aIRR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.08-3.93; Communication aIRR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.00-3.63; Listening aIRR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.27-4.59), compared to those in the LD class. Those in the VL class had higher rates of reporting that their medical provider never or sometimes respected or carefully listened to them (Respect aIRR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.20-3.72; Listening aIRR:1.67, 95% CI:1.03-2.71) than those in, the LD class. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Healthcare organizations committed to providing equitable patient care should establish more robust quality improvement approaches to prevent discrimination at the medical provider level as well as structures of accountability to reconcile previously embedded social inequities within the healthcare system.

OBJECTIVE:Individuals with substance use disorder (SUD) smoke cigarettes at a rate that is more than double the rate of the general population. Tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) is effective at reducing smoking, yet it is unclear whether expanding insurance coverage of these services increases TDT use among Medicaid beneficiaries with SUD. DATA SOURCE:2009-2013 Medicaid data in all 50 states and Washington DC. STUDY DESIGN:We conducted a retrospective analysis of the 2009-2013 de-identified Medicaid Analytic Extract (MAX) claims for a 100% national sample of fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid adult beneficiaries. Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences analysis, we assessed the association of full TDT coverage on TDT medication use and tobacco cessation counseling services between beneficiaries with and without SUD. We adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, diagnosis of co-occurring chronic illness, state tobacco taxes, and state and year fixed effects. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS:We excluded patients not continuously enrolled in Medicaid for 12 months during the calendar year, adults aged 65 and older (given their dual enrollment in Medicaid and Medicare), minors aged 12-17, and pregnant women (for whom different TDT coverage policies apply). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:We separately modeled the association between full coverage of (1) counseling, (2) over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy, and (3) prescription cessation medications on TDT medication treatment and counseling services. We found that each coverage led to increases in any TDT medication treatment and counseling services for beneficiaries with SUD. The effects of each coverage on medication treatment were greater for beneficiaries with SUD compared to beneficiaries without SUD (ranging from 4.9 to 6.1 percentage point difference). CONCLUSION:Coverage of tobacco cessation counseling, over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy, and prescription cessation medications holds promise for reducing the wide disparities in rates of smoking between those with and without SUD.

OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to examine the impact of a behavioral health home (BHH) to better understand its potential to improve health for individuals with serious mental illness. METHODS:Propensity score-weighted interrupted time series analysis was used to estimate service utilization and chronic disease management through 3.5 years after BHH implementation and to compre BHH enrollees (N=413) with other patients with serious mental illness in the same health system (N=1,929). RESULTS:Relative to control group members, BHH patients had an immediate increase in primary care visits (+0.18 visits/month), which remained higher throughout follow-up, and an immediate decrease in emergency department visits (-0.031 visits/month). Behavioral health outpatient visits, which were increasing for BHH participants before implementation, began decreasing postimplementation; this decrease (-0.016 visits/month) was significantly larger than for the control group. Inpatient and outpatient visits for general medical health were decreasing over time for both groups before implementation but decreased more slowly for BHH patients postimplementation. Although behavioral health inpatient visits decreased for both groups around the start of the BHH program and remained lower, this initial drop was larger for the non-BHH group. BHH participation was associated with decreases in hemoglobin A1c values but no shift in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values. CONCLUSIONS:The results reflect the challenges of improving health for patients with serious mental illness, even as access to primary care is increased. Further study is needed about which complex interventions inside and outside of the health care system can help offset the 20- to 30-year mortality gap faced by this population.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the impact of the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) ACOs on mental health and substance use services utilization and racial/ethnic disparities in care for these conditions. DATA SOURCES:Five percent random sample of Medicare claims from 2009 to 2016. STUDY DESIGN:We compared Medicare beneficiaries in MSSP ACOs to non-MSSP beneficiaries, stratifying analyses by Medicare eligibility (disability vs age 65+). We estimated difference-in-difference models of MSSP ACOs on mental health and substance use visits (outpatient and inpatient), medication fills, and adequate care for depression adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, region, and chronic medical and behavioral health conditions. To examine the differential impact of MSSP on our outcomes by race/ethnicity, we used a difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) design. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS:Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:MSSP ACOs were associated with small reductions in outpatient mental health (Coeff: -0.012, P < .001) and substance use (Coeff: -0.001, P < .01) visits in the disability population, and in adequate care for depression for both the disability- and age-eligible populations (Coeff: -0.028, P < .001; Coeff: -0.012, P < .001, respectively). MSSP ACO's were also associated with increases in psychotropic medications (Coeff: 0.007 and Coeff: 0.0213, for disability- and age-eligible populations, respectively, both P < .001) and reductions in inpatient mental health stays (Coeff:-0.004, P < .001, and Coeff:-0.0002, P < .01 for disability- and age-eligible populations, respectively) and substance use-related stays for disability-eligible populations (Coeff:-0.0005, P<.05). The MSSP effect on disparities varied depending on type of service. CONCLUSIONS:We found small reductions in outpatient and inpatient stays and in rates of adequate care for depression associated with MSSP ACOs. As MSSP ACOs are placed at more financial risk for population-based treatment, it will be important to include more robust behavioral health quality measures in their contracts and to monitor disparities in care.

PURPOSE:Structural stigma has shaped disparities across several domains of health for transgender relative to cisgender (nontransgender) adolescents in the United States. Research on transgender health has largely overlooked the role of preventive care, especially for adolescents. METHODS:We used ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes to identify transgender adolescents in the Rhode Island All Payers Claims Database (APCD) from 2011 to 2017 based on a diagnosis for gender identity disorder (GID). We evaluated differences in the use of preventive care services between transgender and cisgender adolescents. We compared the frequency of sexually transmitted infection and HIV screening and the percentage prescribed pre-exposure prophylaxis among transgender and cisgender adolescents using t-tests and chi-square tests. We used logistic regression to evaluate the association between attending regular physical exams and receiving preventive health services. RESULTS:There was no significant difference in the proportion of transgender and cisgender adolescents who received regular influenza vaccinations, physical exams, and HPV vaccinations. Transgender adolescents were significantly more likely to receive regular cholesterol and BMI screenings compared to cisgender adolescents. While there was a significant positive association between having regular physical exams and receiving most preventive screenings in the cisgender population, in the transgender population, regular physical exams were only significantly positively associated with STI screening. CONCLUSIONS:Transgender adolescents accessing the healthcare system received similar, if not greater, levels of preventive health services compared to their cisgender peers. Because regular physical exams were not associated with receiving most preventive services among transgender adolescents, these services may be delivered outside of primary care settings.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:This manuscript evaluates patient and provider perspectives on the core components of a Behavioral Health Home (BHH) implemented in an urban, safety-net health system. The BHH integrated primary care and wellness services (e.g., on-site Nurse Practitioner and Care Manager, wellness groups and tools, population health management) into an existing outpatient clinic for people with serious mental illness (SMI). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:As the qualitative component of a Hybrid Type I effectiveness-implementation study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with providers and patients 6 months after program implementation, and responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. Valence coding (i.e., positive vs. negative acceptability) was also used to rate interviewees' transcriptions with respect to their feedback of the appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility/sustainability of 9 well-described and desirable Integrated Behavioral Health Core components (seven from prior literature and two additional components developed for this intervention). Themes from the thematic analysis were then mapped and organized by each of the 9 components and the degree to which these themes explain valence ratings by component. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Responses about the team-based approach and universal screening for health conditions had the most positive valence across appropriateness, acceptability, and feasibility/sustainability by both providers and patients. Areas of especially high mismatch between perceived provider appropriateness and measures of acceptability and feasibility/sustainability included population health management and use of evidence-based clinical models to improve physical wellness where patient engagement in specific activities and tools varied. Social and peer support was highly valued by patients while incorporating patient voice was also found to be challenging. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Findings reveal component-specific challenges regarding the acceptability, feasibility, and sustainability of specific components. These findings may partly explain mixed results from BHH models studied thus far in the peer-reviewed literature and may help provide concrete data for providers to improve BHH program implementation in clinical settings. PLAIN LANGUAGE ABSTRACT/UNASSIGNED:Many people with serious mental illness also have medical problems, which are made worse by lack of access to primary care. The Behavioral Health Home (BHH) model seeks to address this by adding primary care access into existing interdisciplinary mental health clinics. As these models are implemented with increasing frequency nationwide and a growing body of research continues to assess their health impacts, it is crucial to examine patient and provider experiences of BHH implementation to understand how implementation factors may contribute to clinical effectiveness. This study examines provider and patient perspectives of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility/sustainability of BHH model components at 6-7 months after program implementation at an urban, safety-net health system. The team-based approach of the BHH was perceived to be highly acceptable and appropriate. Although providers found certain BHH components to be highly appropriate in theory (e.g., population-level health management), their acceptability of these approaches as implemented in practice was not as high, and their feedback provides suggestions for model improvements at this and other health systems. Similarly, social and peer support was found to be highly appropriate by both providers and patients, but in practice, at months 6-7, the BHH studied had not yet developed a process of engaging patients in ongoing program operations that was highly acceptable by providers and patients alike. We provide these data on each specific BHH model component, which will be useful to improving implementation in clinical settings of BHH programs that share some or all of these program components.

As a part of a larger, mixed-methods research study, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 adults with depressive symptoms to understand the role that past health care discrimination plays in shaping help-seeking for depression treatment and receiving preferred treatment modalities. We recruited to achieve heterogeneity of racial/ethnic backgrounds and history of health care discrimination in our participant sample. Participants were Hispanic/Latino (n = 4), non-Hispanic/Latino Black (n = 8), or non-Hispanic/Latino White (n = 9). Twelve reported health care discrimination due to race/ethnicity, language, perceived social class, and/or mental health diagnosis. Health care discrimination exacerbated barriers to initiating and continuing depression treatment among patients from diverse backgrounds or with stigmatized mental health conditions. Treatment preferences emerged as fluid and shaped by shared decisions made within a trustworthy patient-provider relationship. However, patients who had experienced health care discrimination faced greater challenges to forming trusting relationships with providers and thus engaging in shared decision-making processes.

IMPORTANCE:In the past decade, many states have implemented policies prohibiting private health insurers from discriminating based on gender identity. Policies banning discrimination have the potential to improve access to care and health outcomes among gender minority (ie, transgender and gender diverse) populations. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate whether state-level nondiscrimination policies are associated with suicidality and inpatient mental health hospitalizations among privately insured gender minority individuals. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:In this cohort study, difference-in-differences analysis comparing changes in mental health outcomes among gender minority enrollees before and after states implemented nondiscrimination policies in 2009-2017 was conducted. A sample of gender minority children and adults was identified using gender minority-related diagnosis codes obtained from private health insurance claims. The present study was conducted from August 1, 2018, to September 1, 2019. EXPOSURE:Living in states that implemented policies banning discrimination based on gender identity in 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:The primary outcome was suicidality. The secondary outcome was inpatient mental health hospitalization. RESULTS:The study population included 28 980 unique gender minority enrollees (mean [SD] age, 26.5 [15] years) from 2009 to 2017. Relative to comparison states, suicidality decreased in the first year after policy implementation in the 2014 policy cohort (odds ratio [OR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58-0.90; P = .005), the 2015 policy cohort (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39-0.64; P < .001), and the 2016 policy cohort (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85; P = .004). This decrease persisted to the second postimplementation year for the 2014 policy cohort (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41-0.57; P < .001) but not for the 2015 policy cohort (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.47-1.38; P = .43). The 2013 policy cohort experienced no significant change in suicidality after policy implementation in all 4 postimplementation years (2014: OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.85-1.67; P = .31; 2015: OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.73-1.20; P = .61; 2016: OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.65-1.03; P = .10; and 2017: OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.90-1.88; P = .18). Mental health hospitalization rates generally decreased or stayed the same for individuals living in policy states vs the comparison group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Implementation of a state-level nondiscrimination policy appears to be associated with decreased or no changes in suicidality among gender minority individuals living in states that implemented these policies from 2013 to 2016. Given high rates of suicidality among gender minority individuals in the US, health insurance nondiscrimination policies may offer a mechanism for reducing barriers to care and mitigating discrimination.