A significant surge in the utilization of mental health services has been observed throughout the duration of the coronavirus pandemic, with teletherapy emerging as a pivotal factor in mitigating barriers to regular therapeutic engagements. This revelation emanates from an expansive investigation of insurance claims, a study of considerable scope, that was recently unveiled in the esteemed JAMA Health Forum.
The research, spanning from March 2020 to August 2022, delves into an extensive dataset comprising 1,554,895 claims for clinician interactions. Impressively, the study illuminates a remarkable upswing in mental health appointments, quantifying a 39 percent escalation, paralleled by a substantial 54 percent surge in expenditure. Notably, the inquiry brings to the fore a tenfold surge in the utilization of telehealth as a channel for therapeutic engagements.
It’s crucial to note that the study encompasses consultations for approximately seven million adults across the nation who are covered by health insurance facilitated through their employers. This scope, while comprehensive, inevitably excludes a segment of individuals grappling with severe mental ailments, and it omits any consideration of acute or residential care.
The repercussions of these heightened trends are projected to endure, even as insurance providers grapple with the decision of sustaining escalated coverage. Christopher M. Whaley, a distinguished health care economist affiliated with the RAND Corporation and a co-author of the study, asserts that the substantial financial ramifications loom large. He underscores how these costs manifest through augmented premiums and elevated deductibles, a financial burden that reverberates across insurance platforms.
Conversely, Whaley draws attention to the fact that individuals confronting unmet mental health exigencies are less inclined to adhere to their prescribed medications. Such individuals are also more prone to resort to emergency room interventions during periods of crisis—a constellation of behaviors that concurrently exerts considerable fiscal stress on insurance pools.
Whaley offers an incisive perspective, stating, “The insurer’s challenge, and what we should think about as a health care system, is what cost is actually bigger.”
Manifesting the evolving landscape of mental health care, the preponderance of the scrutinized appointments was centered around anxiety and depression concerns, collectively constituting 45 percent and 33 percent of the aggregate appointments, respectively. Additional afflictions, although in varying degrees, constituted a significant portion of the therapeutic encounters: post-traumatic stress disorder claimed 10 percent; bipolar disorder, 9 percent; and schizophrenia, 2.6 percent.
Elevating the focus to specific diagnostic categories, it emerges that anxiety disorders witnessed the most notable spike in visits during the pandemic, registering an impressive ascent of 73.7 percent. In a parallel trajectory, post-traumatic stress disorder visits rose by 37 percent, while encounters related to bipolar disorder and depression followed suit, exhibiting upticks of 32 percent and 31.9 percent, respectively. Intriguingly, visits pertaining to schizophrenia remained impervious to change amidst this dynamic backdrop.
