Olga Toro-Devia, Rubén Alvarado, Mercedes Jeria, Denise Razzouk, Luis Salvador-Carulla
{"title":"Exploratory analysis on payment mechanisms to Community Mental Health Centers in Chile using mixed grounded theory.","authors":"Olga Toro-Devia, Rubén Alvarado, Mercedes Jeria, Denise Razzouk, Luis Salvador-Carulla","doi":"10.5867/medwave.2024.05.2920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research on psychiatric deinstitutionalization has neglected that reforms in this field are nested in a health system that has undergone financial reforms. This subordination could introduce incentives that are misaligned with new mental health policies. According to Chile's National Mental Health Plan, this would be the case in the Community Mental Health Centers (CMHC). The goal is to understand how the CMHCpayment mechanism is a potential incentive for community mental health.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed quantitative-qualitative convergent study using grounded theory. We collected administrative production data between 2010 and 2020. Following the payment mechanism theory, we interviewed 25 payers, providers, and user experts. We integrated the results through selective coding. This article presents the relevant results of mixed selective integration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven payment mechanisms implemented heterogeneously in the country's CMHC are recognized. They respond to three schemes subject to rate limits and prospective public budget. They differ in the payment unit. They are associated with implementing the community mental health model negatively affecting users, the services provided, the human resources available, and the governance adopted. Governance, management, and payment unit conditions favoring the community mental health model are identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A disjointed set of heterogeneously implemented payment schemes negatively affects the community mental health model. Formulating an explicit financing policy for mental health that is complementary to existing policies is necessary and possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":18597,"journal":{"name":"Medwave","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medwave","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2024.05.2920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Research on psychiatric deinstitutionalization has neglected that reforms in this field are nested in a health system that has undergone financial reforms. This subordination could introduce incentives that are misaligned with new mental health policies. According to Chile's National Mental Health Plan, this would be the case in the Community Mental Health Centers (CMHC). The goal is to understand how the CMHCpayment mechanism is a potential incentive for community mental health.
Methods: A mixed quantitative-qualitative convergent study using grounded theory. We collected administrative production data between 2010 and 2020. Following the payment mechanism theory, we interviewed 25 payers, providers, and user experts. We integrated the results through selective coding. This article presents the relevant results of mixed selective integration.
Results: Seven payment mechanisms implemented heterogeneously in the country's CMHC are recognized. They respond to three schemes subject to rate limits and prospective public budget. They differ in the payment unit. They are associated with implementing the community mental health model negatively affecting users, the services provided, the human resources available, and the governance adopted. Governance, management, and payment unit conditions favoring the community mental health model are identified.
Conclusions: A disjointed set of heterogeneously implemented payment schemes negatively affects the community mental health model. Formulating an explicit financing policy for mental health that is complementary to existing policies is necessary and possible.
期刊介绍:
Medwave is a peer-reviewed, biomedical and public health journal. Since its foundation in 2001 (Volume 1) it has always been an online only, open access publication that does not charge subscription or reader fees. Since January 2011 (Volume 11, Number 1), all articles are peer-reviewed. Without losing sight of the importance of evidence-based approach and methodological soundness, the journal accepts for publication articles that focus on providing updates for clinical practice, review and analysis articles on topics such as ethics, public health and health policy; clinical, social and economic health determinants; clinical and health research findings from all of the major disciplines of medicine, medical science and public health. The journal does not publish basic science manuscripts or experiments conducted on animals. Until March 2013, Medwave was publishing 11-12 numbers a year. Each issue would be posted on the homepage on day 1 of each month, except for Chile’s summer holiday when the issue would cover two months. Starting from April 2013, Medwave adopted the continuous mode of publication, which means that the copyedited accepted articles are posted on the journal’s homepage as they are ready. They are then collated in the respective issue and included in the Past Issues section.