Good Intentions, but Few Results: Part One in a Two-Part Series about Improving the Quality of Behavioral Health Services

By Dougherty, Richard H. | Behavioral Healthcare, August 2007 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Good Intentions, but Few Results: Part One in a Two-Part Series about Improving the Quality of Behavioral Health Services

Dougherty, Richard H., Behavioral Healthcare

The President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health declared in 2003 that the U.S. mental health system was "fragmented and in disarray." (1) The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Crossing the Quality Chasm report in 2001 raised serious concerns about the quality of general healthcare delivery systems. Both reports call not just for systems reform but for a more profound transformation to address the identified problems. As the 2005 IOM report on behavioral healthcare states:

  Departures from known standards of care, variations in care in the
  absence of care standards, failure to treat M/SU [mental and substance
  use] problems and illnesses, and lack of coordination are of concern
  for many reasons. While they may often represent ineffective care,
  there is evidence that they can also threaten patient safety.... The
  high prevalence and adverse consequences of M/SU problems and
  illnesses, the availability of many efficacious treatments, and the
  widespread delivery of poor-quality care are increasingly being
  recognized by consumers, purchasers, care providers, and policy
  makers. (2)

The report goes on to discuss the problems with collaboration in the field:

    Collaboration by mental, substance-use and general health care
  clinicians is especially difficult because of ... (1) the greater
  separation of mental and substance-use health care from general health
  care; (2) the separation of mental and substance-use health from each
  other; (3) society's reliance on the education, child welfare and
  other non-health care sectors to secure M/SU services for many
  children and adults; and (4) the location of services needed by
  individuals with more severe M/SU illnesses in public sector programs
  apart from private sector health care. (2)

It's not that we haven't tried to improve quality in behavioral health services. Most professionals and administrators seek to maintain and improve quality all the time. The challenge lies in implementing collaborative and systemic approaches to improvement.


The most profound change in the field during the past two decades has been the movement to managed care--a systemic but not collaborative change. It initially was driven by efforts to control costs, but after costs were under control, managed behavioral healthcare organizations (MBHOs) increasingly promised and delivered some levels of improved quality. While costs, standardization of services, and utilization reporting improved, it is fair to say that many consumers experienced reductions in care and did not perceive any improvements in quality.

Most current approaches to quality improvement include accreditation and performance measurement activities. These both are essential, but not sufficient, to ensure system quality. Many providers maintain some form of accreditation and have documented their procedures, undergone reviews, hired quality improvement staff, and operated active quality improvement projects. In fact, accreditation standards and processes have improved dramatically in the past decade. They are more focused on outcomes, use such innovations as "tracer methodology," and focus on consumers' perceptions of care. Most health plans and managed care organizations (MCOs) also meet some form of NCQA, URAC, or other accreditation organization's standards. But, again, these are systemic, not collaborative, efforts.

For more than a decade, public and private behavioral health purchasers have proposed various performance measures for their systems. However, purchasers have had mixed success in implementing and actually using these measures. MBHOs have made major improvements in reporting on utilization and process measures such as re-admission rates and postdischarge follow-up. According to a recent study, public systems that have achieved notable success in performance measurement include the:

* Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services;

* Ohio Department of Mental Health;

* Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services; and

* Washington Mental Health Division.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Good Intentions, but Few Results: Part One in a Two-Part Series about Improving the Quality of Behavioral Health Services


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?