Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Frey and colleagues outline 10 trends showing scale of America's demographic transitions

Starr says surveys intended to predict recidivism assign higher risk to poor

Prescott and colleagues find incidence of noncompetes in U.S. labor force varies by job, state, worker education

Highlights

PAA 2015 Annual Meeting: Preliminary program and list of UM participants

ISR addition wins LEED Gold Certification

PSC Fall 2014 Newsletter now available

Martha Bailey and Nicolas Duquette win Cole Prize for article on War on Poverty

Next Brown Bag

Mon, March 9
Luigi Pistaferri, Consumption Inequality and Family Labor Supply

Exploratory Evidence on the Market for Effective Depression Care in Pittsburgh

Archived Abstract of Former PSC Researcher

Schoenbaum, Michael, K. Kelleher, J.R. Lave, S. Green, D. Keyser, and H. Pincus. 2004. "Exploratory Evidence on the Market for Effective Depression Care in Pittsburgh." Psychiatric Services, 55(4): 392-395.

Objective: Despite the existence of effective and relatively cost-effective depression treatments, many depressed patients do not receive appropriate care. The authors assessed opportunities for increasing the rate of effective depression treatment by investigating the market for such treatment in the Pittsburgh area. Methods: A conceptual framework was developed to evaluate the market for effective depression care. On the basis of the conceptual framework, interviews were conducted with representatives from seven large employers, two medical health insurance carriers, two behavioral health insurance carriers, four primary care providers, and four behavioral health care providers. Respondents were asked to assess the barriers to and opportunities for increasing the rates of depression treatment from their perspectives. Results: The findings suggest that there is currently little demand among purchasers for improving depression care and little interest among insurers and providers for improving care in the absence of purchaser demand. Even stakeholders who identified depression as an important problem could not come to a consensus about who should be responsible for addressing the problem. Employers reported that they look primarily to their vendors to initiate quality improvement efforts, whereas insurers reported that such improvement efforts were more likely to occur if they were initiated by employers who purchase their health plans; providers, in turn, reported feeling powerless to initiate change. Conclusions: The absence of a clear locus of responsibility for improving depression care lends considerable inertia to the status quo. Because the currently low treatment rates are likely to be socially inefficient, researchers and policy makers should consider strategies to help overcome this inertia.

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next