BACKGROUND: Schools play an important role as providers of mental health services for adolescents; however, information on the broader picture of utilization of mental health services in educational versus other settings is limited because of the lack of national-level data. METHODS:Using multinomial logistic regression models based on national-level data from the 2012-2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, we explore the characteristics of adolescents who received mental health treatment in educational and other settings. In addition, the study examines the reasons for seeking services in various treatment settings. RESULTS:The analysis finds that while the majority of adolescents who access mental health services receive care at noneducational settings, slightly more than one-third of them received services only in an educational setting. Adolescents who had public insurance, were from low-income households, and were from racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely to access services in an educational setting only. Common reasons for accessing services in educational settings included problems with schools, friends, and family members. CONCLUSIONS:Despite increased access to treatment in outpatient settings in the last decade, schools play an important role in providing access to mental health services for disadvantaged populations.

Laws designed to increase layperson engagement in opioid-overdose reversal were associated with reduced opioid-overdose mortality. We found no evidence that these measures were associated with increased non-medical opioid use.

Each of the data sources described in this article has unique advantages and disadvantages when used to examine patterns of ED care, making the different data sources appropriate for different applications. Analysts should select a data source according to its construction and should bear in mind its strengths and weaknesses in drawing conclusions based on the estimates it yields.

Many patients who seek emergency department (ED) treatment are not well enough for immediate discharge but are not clearly sick enough to warrant full inpatient admission. These patients are increasingly treated as outpatients using observation services. Hospitals employ four basic approaches to observation services, which can be categorized by the presence or absence of a dedicated observation unit and of defined protocols. To understand which approach might have the greatest impact, we compared 2010 data from three sources: a case study of observation units in Atlanta, Georgia; statewide discharge data for Georgia; and national survey and discharge data. Compared to patients receiving observation services elsewhere in the hospital, patients cared for in "type 1" observation units-dedicated units with defined protocolshave a 23-38 percent shorter length-of-stay, a 17-44 percent lower probability of subsequent inpatient admission, and $950 million in potential national cost savings each year. Furthermore, we estimate that 11.7 percent of short-stay inpatients nationwide could be treated in a type 1 unit, with possible savings of $5.5-$8.5 billion annually. Policy makers should have hospitals report the setting in which observation services are provided and consider payment incentives for care in a type 1 unit.

Considerable controversy exists about the appropriate way hospital competition should be measured and whether findings are accurate if certain methods are employed. Data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), the American Hospital Association (AHA), and other supplemental data sources are used to create and evaluate hospital competition measures. Correlation coefficients of these measures are assessed. Moreover, each measure is independently included as an explanatory variable in otherwise identical hospital cost function regressions. Their corresponding parameter estimates are then compared. Most measures are highly correlated. Inferences about the effect of competition on hospital cost remain the same when alternative hospital competition measures are employed. We caution researchers against using this finding to arbitrarily select a competition measure when the magnitude of the estimates is important. Copyright Springer 2004hospital competition measures, hospital markets,