The Volume-Quality Relationship of Mental Health Care

Does Practice Make Perfect?

Published in: American Journal of Psychiatry, v. 161, no. 12, Dec. 2004, p. 2282-2286

Posted on on January 01, 2004

by Benjamin Druss, Carolyn Levinson Miller, Harold Alan Pincus, Sarah Shih

Read More

Access further information on this document at

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

OBJECTIVE: An extensive literature has demonstrated a relationship between hospital volume and outcomes for surgical care and other medical procedures. The authors examined whether an analogous association exists between the volume of mental health delivery and the quality of mental health care. METHOD: The study used data for the 384 health maintenance organizations participating in the Health Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS), covering 73 million enrollees nationwide. Analyses examined the association between three measures of mental health volume (total annual ambulatory visits, inpatient discharges, and inpatient days) and the five HEDIS measures of mental health performance (two measures of follow-up after psychiatric hospitalization and three measures of outpatient antidepressant management), with adjustment for plan and enrollee characteristics. RESULTS: Plans in the lowest quartile of outpatient and inpatient mental health volume had an 8.45 (95% CI [confidence interval]=4.97-14.37) to 21.09 (95% CI=11.32-39.28) times increase in odds of poor 7- and 30-day follow-up after discharge from inpatient psychiatric hospitalization. Low-volume plans had a 3.49 (95% CI=2.15-5.67) to 5.42 (95% CI=3.21-9.15) times increase in odds of poor performance on the acute, continuation, and provider measures of antidepressant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The large and consistent association between mental health volume and performance suggests parallels with the medical and surgical literature. As with that previous literature, further work is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying this association and the potential implications for using volume as a criterion in plan choice.

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

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.