Effects of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act on Specialty Outpatient Behavioral Health Spending and Utilization.

DISCUSSION: Potential reasons for MHPAEA's apparent lack of effect are that health plans were already at parity before the law's passage, that many health plans continue to be out of compliance with the law, that concurrent changes in plans' cost-sharing blunted the law's effects, and that other barriers to behavioral health service use continue to limit utilization. While our study cannot provide direct evidence of these mechanisms, we review existing evidence in support of each of them. Our study had several limitations. We cannot test definitively whether the difference-in-differences assumption was violated or fully control for time-varying differences between groups. We attempt to address this by using multiple control groups and presenting evidence of parallel trends before MHPAEA implementation. Second, because our data do not have state identifiers, we cannot control for which states had existing mental health parity laws. Third, a nationally representative analysis may mask substantial heterogeneity for affected subgroups. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH POLICIES: We find no evidence MHPAEA substantially affected behavioral health utilization or out-of-pocket spending. Federal parity legislation alone is likely insufficient to address barriers to behavioral health affordability and access. PMID: 30530870 [PubMed - in process]
Source: Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics - Category: Psychiatry Tags: J Ment Health Policy Econ Source Type: research