The Relationship Between Type of Mental Health Provider and Met and Unmet Mental Health Needs in a Nationally Representative Sample of HIV-positive Patients

Published in: Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research, v. 31, no. 2, Apr.-June 2004, p. 149-163

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2004

by Stephanie L. Taylor, M. Audrey Burnam, Cathy D. Sherbourne, Ronald Andersen, William Cunningham

Read More

Access further information on this document at www.fmhi.usf.edu

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

This study examined mental health service utilization among a nationally representative sample of adults with HIV and psychiatric disorders or perceived need for mental health services. Data are from the HIV Cost and Services Utilization Study (HCSUS) mental health survey (n=1,489) conducted in 1997-1998. Most (70%) needed mental health care. Of these, 30% received no mental health services in the previous six months, 16% received services from general medical providers (GMPs) only, and 54% used mental health specialists. Clients with perceived need for care were more likely to receive any mental health services and services from mental health specialists (versus GMPs) than clients having mental disorders without perceived need. More patients using specialists versus GMPs received psychotherapeutic medications and psychiatric hospitalizations, controlling for psychiatric symptom severity. The findings underscore that the differential mental health service provision between specialists and GMPs existing in the general population also is present among persons with HIV.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.