
Objectives. I assessed recent trends in prevalence of any contact with mental health professionals and nonuse of mental health care or prescription medications owing to cost among adults with significant psychological distress. Methods. In samples drawn from the National Health Interview Survey of 1997–2002, multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association of survey year with mental health professional contacts and nonuse of mental health care or prescription medications owing to cost. Results. The prevalence of any contact with mental health professionals increased from 29.1% in 1997 to 35.5% in 2002 (P<.05). The prevalence of nonuse of services because of cost also increased—from 15.6% to 20.0% for mental health care (P<.05) and from 27.7% to 34.1% for medication use (P<.001). Age, racial/ethnic, income, and insurance status disparities in receiving care persisted over the study period. Conclusions. The number of individuals in need of mental health care who contacted mental health professionals grew in recent years, as did the number of individuals who encountered cost barriers to such care. Barring dramatic improvements in health insurance coverage, more individuals will likely face such barriers in coming years.
Adult, Male, Adolescent, Health Personnel, Age Factors, Middle Aged, Community Mental Health Services, Health Services Accessibility, Insurance Coverage, Cross-Sectional Studies, Tranquilizing Agents, Costs and Cost Analysis, Income, Humans, Female, Stress, Psychological, Aged
Adult, Male, Adolescent, Health Personnel, Age Factors, Middle Aged, Community Mental Health Services, Health Services Accessibility, Insurance Coverage, Cross-Sectional Studies, Tranquilizing Agents, Costs and Cost Analysis, Income, Humans, Female, Stress, Psychological, Aged
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 93 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
