The University of Georgia Different Sectors, Different Services? Examining variations in treatment program caseloads Paul M. Roman, Ph.D. Lori J. Ducharme,

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

N T C S at UGA * Funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Adoption of Evidence-based Practices in Addiction Treatment.

Advertisements

Background: The low retention rates among African Americans in substance abuse treatment (Milligan et al., 2004) combined with the limited number of treatments.

Community-based Clinical Trials: Site Variation and Adoption of Innovation Dennis McCarty, PhD Allie Buti, MPH Lynn Kunkel, MS, CCRP Holly Fussell, PhD.

Differences in Characteristics of Heroin Inhalers and Injectors at Admission to Treatment J. C. Maxwell, R. T. Spence, & T. M. Bohman UT Center for Social.

Introduction Results and Conclusions Comparisons on the TITIS fidelity measure indicated a significant difference between the IT and AS models on the Staffing.

The University of Georgia CTN Membership and Innovation Adoption: Baseline Data from the UGA “Platform” Study NIDA Research Grant R01DA14482 Paul M. Roman,

2 H. Westley Clark, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., CAS, FASAM Director Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration.

Exploring Behavioral Health Integration through Data Mental Hygiene Administration Annual Conference May 14, 2014 Revised May 28,

The University of Georgia Use of ASAM PPC: Data from a National Sample of Addiction Treatment Programs J. Aaron Johnson, PhD The University of Georgia.

Your university’s logo here How Do Vocational Rehabilitation Outcomes Vary Among Different Types of Living Arrangements? Fabricio E. Balcazar, PhD Professor.

Anthony T. Lo Sasso, PhD Gayle R. Byck, PhD University of Illinois at Chicago Thanks to NICHD for grant support.

The University of Georgia Variations in the Adoption of Management Practices Across Types of Substance Abuse Treatment Systems Paul M. Roman Hannah K.

Nursing Care Makes A Difference The Application of Omaha Documentation System on Clients with Mental Illness.

Attractive Addiction Treatment...? Can we make addiction treatment engaging?

Audrey J. Brooks, PhD University of Arizona CA-AZ node.

Bureau of Drug and Alcohol Services (BDAS) /DHHS Presentation to the Gaming Study Commission March 16 th, 2010 Joe Harding – Director –

1 Advancing Recovery: Baltimore Buprenorphine Initiative Tucson Presentation July 29, 2009 Baltimore Substance Abuse Systems.

January 25, 2011 Georgia Behavioral Health Caucus Community Care Joseph Bona, MD, MBA Chief Medical Officer DeKalb Community Service Board.

1 Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services Division Association of Substance Abuse Providers Mike Maples October 5, 2011.

The University of Georgia Challenges for the Modern TC: Balancing Tradition with the Demands of Today’s Health Care System J. Aaron Johnson Hannah K. Knudsen.

ABSTRACT METHODS RESULTS CONCLUSION Background: Georgia rates the quality of early childcare learning centers using a tiered quality improvement system.

AOD Use and Mental Health Disparities during Pregnancy and Postpartum Victoria H. Coleman, Ph.D. & Michael L. Dennis, Ph.D. Chestnut Health Systems, Bloomington,

The University of Georgia Adoption of Medications in Therapeutic Communities: Rates and Organizational Correlates Lori J. Ducharme, Ph.D. Hannah K. Knudsen,

Results of the Vivitrol Pilot in Los Angeles County Presented by: Desiree A. Crevecoeur-MacPhail, Ph.D. Research Psychologist, UCLA ISAP.

Disparities in the Adequacy of Depression Treatment in the United States Jeffrey S. Harman, Ph.D. University of Florida Mark J. Edlund, M.D., Ph.D. John.

The NIDCR funded Collaborating Research Centers to Reduce Oral Health Disparities (CRCROHD) represent an innovative approach to understanding determinants.

METHODS Sample n=245 Women, 24% White, 72% Average age, 36.5 Never married, 51% Referral Sources (%) 12-Month DSM-IV Substance Dependence Prior to Entering.

The University of Georgia The Treatment of Oxycodone Abuse: Organizational Predictors of Admissions Hannah K. Knudsen Lori J. Ducharme J. Aaron Johnson.

Overview of Issues: Barriers to Developing EHR in This Field Constance Weisner, DrPH, MSW Jennifer Mertens, PhD Stacy Sterling, MSW, MPH Narrowing the.

The University of Georgia Racial Disparities in Access to Addiction Treatment Medications Hannah K. Knudsen, Ph.D. Lori J. Ducharme, Ph.D. Paul M. Roman,

The University of Georgia Therapeutic Communities in the USA: A Dynamic Present and a Challenging Future Paul M. Roman, Ph.D. The University of Georgia.

Predictors of Buprenorphine Adoption in Methadone and non- Methadone Treatment Settings Lori J. Ducharme, Ph.D. Hannah K. Knudsen, Ph.D. Paul M. Roman,

The University of Georgia Adoption of Innovative Treatment Techniques in Public and Private Substance Abuse Programs Hannah K. Knudsen, Ph.D. Paul M. Roman,

Criminal Justice Referral and Incentives in Outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment Anthony DeFulio 1, Paul Nuzzo 2, & Maxine Stitzer 1 1 – Johns Hopkins.

The University of Georgia Smoking Cessation Programs in Addiction Treatment Centers: An Organizational Analysis Hannah K. Knudsen, Ph.D. Lori J. Ducharme,

Exploration of the Substance Abuse Treatment Workforce: Education, Preparation and Certification Traci Rieckmann, Ph.D., Bret Fuller, Ph.D, Dennis McCarty,

The University of Georgia Trends in Adoption of Medications for Alcohol Dependence Lori J. Ducharme, J. Aaron Johnson, Hannah K. Knudsen & Paul M. Roman.

N T C S at UGA * Funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Program Emphasis on Spirituality and Adoption of Evidence-based.

Introduction Results and Conclusions ATR Results: On demographic and social characteristics, ATR completers were more likely to be Hispanic, employed,

Introduction Introduction Alcohol Abuse Characteristics Results and Conclusions Results and Conclusions Analyses comparing primary substance of abuse indicated.

Coverage and Management of Medications for Treating Substance Abuse in Health Plans Constance M. Horgan, Sc.D. Sharon Reif, Ph.D. Dominic Hodgkin, Ph.D.

Introduction Results and Conclusions Categorical group comparisons revealed no differences on demographic or social variables. At admission to treatment,

Introduction Results and Conclusions On demographic variables, analyses revealed that ATR clients were more likely to be Hispanic and employed, whereas.

The University of Georgia

Abstinence Incentive Effects in Psychosocial Counseling Patients Testing Stimulant Positive vs Negative at Treatment Entry Maxine L. Stitzer Johns Hopkins.

The University of Georgia Training and exposure to evidence-based practices: Changing attitudes among the addiction treatment workforce J. Aaron Johnson,

Introduction Results and Conclusions Analyses of demographic and social variables revealed that women were more likely to have children, be living in a.

Relational Discord at Conclusion of Treatment Predicts Future Substance Use for Partnered Patients Wayne H. Denton, MD, PhD; Paul A. Nakonezny, PhD; Bryon.

Introduction Results and Conclusions On counselor background variables, no differences were found between the MH and SA COSPD specialists on race/ethnicity,

1 Clinical Supervision in the CTN: Availability, Content, and Impact on Counselors Lori J. Ducharme, Hannah K. Knudsen, J. Aaron Johnson & Paul M. Roman.

Background Objectives Results Methods Within State Geographic Variation in Antipsychotic Medication Treatment for Medicaid-insured Children and Adolescents.

Counselor Attitudes toward Buprenorphine in the Clinical Trials Network* Hannah K. Knudsen, Ph.D., 1 & Paul M. Roman, Ph.D. 2 1 Department of Behavioral.

Innovative Financing of Out-of-Home Placements July 24, 2002 Governor’s Action Group for Safe Children Work Group #3.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act The Greens: Elijah, Amber, Kayla, Patrick.

How much of the variation in hospital financial performance is explained by service mix? Presented by: Richard Lindrooth Medical University of South Carolina.

Introduction Results and Conclusions Comparisons of psychiatric hospitalization rates in the 12 months prior to and after baseline assessment revealed.

The University of Georgia Wraparound Services in the Public and Private Treatment Sectors: Are Patients Receiving Comprehensive Care? Lori J. Ducharme,

The University of Georgia CTN Membership and Innovation Adoption: Preliminary Data from the UGA “Platform” Study NIDA Research Grant R01DA14482 Paul M.

BEHAVIORAL FAMILY COUNSELING AND NALTREXONE FOR MALE OPIOID-DEPENDENT PATIENTS William Fals-Stewart, Ph.D. Research Institute on Addictions.

Introduction Results and Conclusions Numerous demographic variables were found to be associated with treatment completion. Completers were more likely.

Introduction Results and Conclusions Results: On demographic and social characteristics, ATR completers were more likely to be male, Hispanic, employed,

Medication Adherence and Substance Abuse Predict 18-Month Recidivism among Mental Health Jail Diversion Program Clients Elizabeth N. Burris 1, Evan M.

Trends in Access to Substance Abuse Treatment for Women and Men: Jeanne C. Marsh, PhD, Hee-Choon Shin, PhD, Dingcai Cao, PhD University of Chicago.

PURPOSE BACKGROUND RESULTS STUDY DESIGN & METHODS HIV Risk Behaviors Among Male Prisoners Participating in a Randomized Clinical Trial of Methadone Maintenance.

Recovery Support Outcomes: Client and Service Characteristics Associated with Successful Completion of ATR Services Laurel Mangrum, PhDa, Michele Steinley-Bumgarner,

Emergency department pediatric psychiatric services

Using the National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices (NCJTP) Survey

Orion Mowbray, PhD University of Georgia Brian Perron, PhD

Believed discrimination occurred because of their:

Presentation transcript:

The University of Georgia Different Sectors, Different Services? Examining variations in treatment program caseloads Paul M. Roman, Ph.D. Lori J. Ducharme, Ph.D. Meredith P. Huey, M.A. Center for Research on Behavioral Health & Human Services Delivery Institute for Behavioral Research With research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01-DA13110, R01-DA14482, R01-DA14976)

The University of Georgia Background Organizational theorists suggest multiple categorizations of public and private organizations based on public interest, ownership, funding, and profit status (Dahl and Lindblom 1953; Wamsley and Zald 1973; Bozeman 1987; Perry and Rainey 1988). Yet, within the substance abuse treatment field there has been longstanding attention to the notion of a “two-tiered” system of treatment delivery. –“There are two highly contrasting tiers of drug treatment—one for the poor under public sponsorship and one for those who can pay with insurance or out-of-pocket funds…” ( Gerstein and Harwood 1990: 200) Assertions have been made that differences between public- and private-sector programs translate into significant disparities in the scope and quality of services available to patients assessing treatment (Yahr 1988; Gerstein and Harwood 1990; Wheeler et al. 1992).

The University of Georgia Clarifying the Public-Private Distinction in the Substance Abuse Treatment Field Prior research has distinguished public from private centers by ownership—private vs. government owned (state and federal)—and profit status—for profit vs. not for profit. Research has confirmed differences in characteristics of private for profit and government owned centers, however, little knowledge has been generated about not for profit centers. –The characteristics of not for profit centers fall somewhere between those of private for profit and government owned programs. Comparisons of private for profit, not for profit, and government owned centers suggest a system characterized by multiple tiers.

The University of Georgia Alternative Classification: Revenue Sources In addition to disparities in caseloads, research has shown that public and private programs differ in sources of revenue –Private centers receive a majority of funds from out-of-pocket payments or from private insurance; public centers receive revenues mainly from government sources (Heinrich & Lynn 2002). An alternative method for classifying public and private centers is based on ownership, profit status, and funding resulting in a “four tiered” system: –Privately Funded For Profit, Privately Funded Not for Profit, Publicly Funded Not for Profit, and Government Owned programs.

The University of Georgia Research Question Are there meaningful differences among treatment centers differentiated by these four “types”? Specifically, to what extent do these four types of treatment centers differ in terms of their caseloads characteristics?

The University of Georgia Sample: The National Treatment Center Study National samples of publicly-funded (N=345) and privately-funded (N=401) substance abuse treatment centers Eligibility Criteria: –Community-based programs providing treatment for substance abuse at a level of care equivalent to structured outpatient programming (as defined by ASAM Patient Placement Criteria) Exclusion Criteria: –Counselors in private practice, DUI / driver education programs, halfway houses, and programs offering exclusively methadone maintenance services were not eligible –correctional facilities and VA facilities were not eligible

The University of Georgia Definitions: –“Private” centers receive < 50% revenues from government block grants/contracts –“Public” centers receive > 50% revenues from government block grants/contracts Data collected via on-site interviews with center administrators in 2002-’03 –Private center response rate=80% –Public center response rate=88% Pooled, unweighted data (N=746) are reported in all analyses.

The University of Georgia Measures and Analysis We used one-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs) to identify differences in caseload characteristics across the four types of centers: Referral Sources –Proportion from: EAPs, other workplaces, legal system, and social service agencies Caseload –Proportion who are: Women, Adolescents, Racial/ethnic Minorities, Charity Patients, Relapsers, Probationers/Parolees Primary Diagnosis –Proportion with primary dependence on alcohol, cocaine, opiates, and methamphetamine

The University of Georgia Distribution of Sample by Center Type

The University of Georgia Findings: Referral Sources For Profit Private NP Public NP Gov’t EAP 9.1%6.9%3.2%2.6% Other Workplace 7.0%5.5%4.6%2.7% Legal System 25.2%22.3%39.6%38.0% Social Services 13.9%16.8%23.0%20.8% Shading denotes significant between-group differences (p<.05)

The University of Georgia Findings: Caseload For Profit Private NP Public NP Gov’t Minorities 29.5%31.0%50.6%44.7% Relapsers 50.0%56.2%62.4%61.5% Probation/Parole 35.7%33.3%51.5%51.0% Charity 5.0%8.3%14.6%23.0% Shading denotes significant between-group differences (p<.05) No significant differences on % women or % adolescent clients

The University of Georgia Findings: Primary Diagnosis For Profit Private NP Public NP Gov’t Alcohol 51.5%49.8%38.8%40.0% Cocaine 17.8%18.9%26.6%21.8% Opiates 16.7%18.7%14.2%14.7% Methamphetamine 9.1%6.8%11.9%13.2% Shading denotes significant between-group differences (p<.05)

The University of Georgia Summary of Findings These data show significant variation among treatment centers classified by a combination of revenue source and profit status. Several of these findings are consistent with previous research describing a “two-tiered” system (i.e., privately funded programs differ from publicly funded programs). However, these data show significant contrasts within “nonprofit” programs when considering the centers’ primary funding source. Differences between publicly-funded non-profits and privately-funded non-profits deserve further research: –Are there differences in organizational structure and staffing? –Are there differences in service provision? –Are there differences in innovative behavior? –Implications for patient retention and outcomes.