Promoting Mental Health Recovery After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

What Can Be Done at What Cost

Published In: Archives of General Psychiatry, v. 66, no. 8, Aug. 2009, p. 906-914

Posted on RAND.org on January 01, 2009

by Michael Schoenbaum, Brittany Butler, Sheryl H. Kataoka, Grayson Norquist, Benjamin Springgate, Greer Sullivan, Naihua Duan, Ronald C Kessler, Kenneth B. Wells

Read More

Access further information on this document at American Medical Association

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

CONTEXT: Concerns about mental health recovery persist after the 2005 Gulf storms. The authors propose a recovery model and estimate costs and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs and outcomes of enhanced mental health response to large-scale disasters using the 2005 Gulf storms as a case study. DESIGN: Decision analysis using state-transition Markov models for 6-month periods from 7 to 30 months after disasters. Simulated movements between health states were based on probabilities drawn from the clinical literature and expert input. SETTING: A total of 117 counties/parishes across Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas that the Federal Emergency Management Agency designated as eligible for individual relief following hurricanes Katrina and Rita. PARTICIPANTS: Hypothetical cohort, based on the size and characteristics of the population affected by the Gulf storms. INTERVENTION: Enhanced mental health care consisting of evidence-based screening, assessment, treatment, and care coordination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Morbidity in 6-month episodes of mild/moderate or severe mental health problems through 30 months after the disasters; units of service (eg, office visits, prescriptions, hospital nights); intervention costs; and use of human resources. RESULTS: Full implementation would cost $1133 per capita, or more than $12.5 billion for the affected population, and yield 94.8% to 96.1% recovered by 30 months, but exceed available provider capacity. Partial implementation would lower costs and recovery proportionately. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based mental health response is feasible, but requires targeted resources, increased provider capacity, and advanced planning.

Research conducted by

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.

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.