Cargando…

Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a substantial problem in the United States (U.S.), affecting far more people than receive treatment. This is true broadly and within the U.S. military veteran population, which is our focus. To increase funding for treatment, the Veterans Health Adminis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frakt, Austin B, Trafton, Jodie, Wallace, Amy, Neuman, Matthew, Pizer, Steven
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3722030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23866119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-79
_version_ 1782278128506241024
author Frakt, Austin B
Trafton, Jodie
Wallace, Amy
Neuman, Matthew
Pizer, Steven
author_facet Frakt, Austin B
Trafton, Jodie
Wallace, Amy
Neuman, Matthew
Pizer, Steven
author_sort Frakt, Austin B
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a substantial problem in the United States (U.S.), affecting far more people than receive treatment. This is true broadly and within the U.S. military veteran population, which is our focus. To increase funding for treatment, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has implemented several initiatives over the past decade to direct funds toward SUD treatment, supplementing the unrestricted funds VA medical centers receive. We study the ‘flypaper effect’ or the extent to which these directed funds have actually increased SUD treatment spending. METHODS: The study sample included all VA facilities and used observational data spanning years 2002 to 2010. Data were analyzed with a fixed effects, ordinary least squares specification with monetized workload as the dependent variable and funding dedicated to SUD specialty clinics the key dependent variable, controlling for unrestricted funding. RESULTS: We observed different effects of dedicated SUD specialty clinic funding over the period 2002 to 2008 versus 2009 to 2010. In the earlier period, there is no evidence of a significant portion of the dedicated funding sticking to its target. In the later period, a substantial proportion—38% in 2009 and 61% in 2010—of funding dedicated to SUD specialty clinics did translate into increased medical center spending for SUD treatment. In comparison, only five cents of every dollar of unrestricted funding is spent on SUD treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to unrestricted funding, dedicated funding for SUD treatment was much more effective in increasing workload, but only in years 2009 and 2010. The differences in those years relative to prior ones may be due to the observed management focus on SUD and SUD-related treatment in the later years. If true, this suggests that in a centrally directed healthcare organization such as the VA, funding dedicated to a service is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for increasing resources expended for that service.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3722030
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37220302013-07-25 Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study Frakt, Austin B Trafton, Jodie Wallace, Amy Neuman, Matthew Pizer, Steven Implement Sci Research BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are a substantial problem in the United States (U.S.), affecting far more people than receive treatment. This is true broadly and within the U.S. military veteran population, which is our focus. To increase funding for treatment, the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has implemented several initiatives over the past decade to direct funds toward SUD treatment, supplementing the unrestricted funds VA medical centers receive. We study the ‘flypaper effect’ or the extent to which these directed funds have actually increased SUD treatment spending. METHODS: The study sample included all VA facilities and used observational data spanning years 2002 to 2010. Data were analyzed with a fixed effects, ordinary least squares specification with monetized workload as the dependent variable and funding dedicated to SUD specialty clinics the key dependent variable, controlling for unrestricted funding. RESULTS: We observed different effects of dedicated SUD specialty clinic funding over the period 2002 to 2008 versus 2009 to 2010. In the earlier period, there is no evidence of a significant portion of the dedicated funding sticking to its target. In the later period, a substantial proportion—38% in 2009 and 61% in 2010—of funding dedicated to SUD specialty clinics did translate into increased medical center spending for SUD treatment. In comparison, only five cents of every dollar of unrestricted funding is spent on SUD treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to unrestricted funding, dedicated funding for SUD treatment was much more effective in increasing workload, but only in years 2009 and 2010. The differences in those years relative to prior ones may be due to the observed management focus on SUD and SUD-related treatment in the later years. If true, this suggests that in a centrally directed healthcare organization such as the VA, funding dedicated to a service is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for increasing resources expended for that service. BioMed Central 2013-07-18 /pmc/articles/PMC3722030/ /pubmed/23866119 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-79 Text en Copyright © 2013 Frakt et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Frakt, Austin B
Trafton, Jodie
Wallace, Amy
Neuman, Matthew
Pizer, Steven
Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title_full Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title_fullStr Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title_full_unstemmed Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title_short Directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
title_sort directed funding to address under-provision of treatment for substance use disorders: a quantitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3722030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23866119
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-8-79
work_keys_str_mv AT fraktaustinb directedfundingtoaddressunderprovisionoftreatmentforsubstanceusedisordersaquantitativestudy
AT traftonjodie directedfundingtoaddressunderprovisionoftreatmentforsubstanceusedisordersaquantitativestudy
AT wallaceamy directedfundingtoaddressunderprovisionoftreatmentforsubstanceusedisordersaquantitativestudy
AT neumanmatthew directedfundingtoaddressunderprovisionoftreatmentforsubstanceusedisordersaquantitativestudy
AT pizersteven directedfundingtoaddressunderprovisionoftreatmentforsubstanceusedisordersaquantitativestudy