On direct patient participation in the cost of their psychiatric care. Part I. A review of the empirical and experimental evidence.
In the midst of a sociopolitical debate regarding access to health services, an evaluation is required of the therapeutic impact of the direct participation by some patients in the cost of their psychiatric treatment. Empirical clinical concepts regarding the need for a direct payment of treatment by the patient have evolved. Initial rigorous practice systems have lead to more flexible methods allowing for the recognition of third-party financing. Psychoanalytic theory has addressed the issue most extensively, but other conceptual frameworks have reached similar conclusions as well. The experimental evidence to either support or refute the position that the direct payment of a fee has a beneficial effect on therapeutic outcome remains limited. The focus has been on studying the impact of fee manipulation, but a tested correlation of other motivators such as patient's insight, therapist's attitudes and behaviour and social pressures is mostly lacking. Two patient populations appear to be delineated. Fee participation is of particular value to the financially secure and to the educated while patients in need of less intensive involvement, with reality testing disturbance and limited insight benefit particularly from third party insurance. Different patient populations should have the right to choose different payment options.
D002170:Canada; D005380:Financing, Government; D005382:Financing, Personal; D006291:Health Policy; D006297:Health Services Accessibility / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D008605:Mental Health Services / Q000191:economics*; D010358:Patient Participation; D011573:Psychoanalytic Interpretation; D011613:Psychotherapy / Q000191:economics*