Introduction
In 2006, the Australian federal government allocated funding to facilitate access to mental health services by initiating new subsidies through the Medical Benefits Scheme (MBS) specifically for mental health services. Under the Better Access Scheme (BAS) a range of new general practitioner (GP), psychology, selected social worker and occupational therapy services were made available for those people with diagnosed mental health problems.1 Despite efforts to implement the BAS as a universally subsidised service, equity of access to mental healthcare services has not always been achieved.2–4
For most people experiencing from some form of psychological distress, accessing services is critical in achieving improved mental health.5 6 The patient’s perceived need for services has been found to play an important role in accessing care. People identified counselling services as a facility for gaining an understanding of their illness, recognising stressors such as relationship difficulties, and for determining when to move away from a sole reliance on medications.7 However, Meadows and Bobevski8 found that while most people using mental health services in Australia consult a GP, psychiatrist or a psychologist they also noted that a significant proportion of participants reported an unmet need, and those who received care were often unclear as to whether sufficient help was received.
Unmet needs can be due to a number of barriers, of which financial cost9 10 and concern for social discrimination are the most significant.11–13 Satisfaction with mental healthcare was seen by patients as achievable when sufficient support and assistance were received and those reporting satisfactory care generally had improved mental health.7 14 Dissatisfaction with treatment was also found to be attributable to a number of factors (such as caregiver assistance, inadequate and poor treatment) generally leading to more difficult lives for people suffering with mental health problems.15
People suffering from depression or anxiety experience disproportionately higher rates of disability and mortality compared with the general population.3 16 17 Therefore, mental health services need to provide a treatment path to recovery through an integrated approach with continuity of care suited to each individual.18 19 Ideally, if policy and resource priorities are to be effectively identified, the individual’s perspective is necessary in order to understand the need for mental healthcare, who seeks help and the type of help required to improve mental health. To date, modifications to strategies aimed at satisfying the policy of national access equity requires an understanding of the attributes of those who do and do not use the BAS services, and an understanding of the impediments impacting service access.20
Under the BAS an initial, referral by a GP to five counselling sessions are provided with a further five available following a GP review per calendar year. An additional five sessions are available in exceptional circumstances only. Services are not expected to be ongoing or to be provided over multiple years,1 however, where patients are in need of mental health services they may access up to 15 per year. Many studies evaluating the BAS initiative21 22 have generally found that the scheme has contributed to the improvement of consumer health. However, others2 22 23 claim a methodological weakness in these BAS evaluations, stating that evidential evidence could not be provided on the effectiveness of the initiative.
Numerous studies have examined the introduction of the BAS and the characteristics and determinates of use of the mental health services.2 21 24–28 Many studies have found that the BAS is providing access to care for those with psychological distress but gaps in the literature exist on service delivery of inequitable access to good quality healthcare for those with the greatest need. Despite efforts to implement the BAS as a universally subsidised service, equity or access to mental healthcare services has not always been achieved.2 29 30 Additionally, service demand for mental healthcare has been shown to vary among Australian adults and treatment patterns follow a gradient based on need.29–31 Yet, while these studies show evidence of service use and need, no study to date has assessed use of the mental health services over time.
Little is known about the intersection of mental health service use among the subpopulations of women who are high risk of need, let alone the complexity of their mental health service use. Therefore, the aims of this study are to examine patterns of mental health service use over time among high-risk women that have a mental health plan under the BAS and to examine the associations between use of BAS mental health services and demographic covariates. To address the study’s goals, we hypothesised those Australian women who have a need for mental health services will access the government’s subsidised services for the recommended number of government allocated visits per year, and that only a subgroup of women will not access the mental health services. We aim to (1) determine the proportion of women that have a GP mental health assessment but do not use the allocated mental health services; (2) identify subgroups of women who show similar patterns of mental health service use over time and (3) examine the characteristics that define women into each subgroup. Further, we expect to determine the characteristics of, barriers to and specific use of BAS mental health services by the defined subgroups of women.