Private health insurance, mental health and service use in Australia

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report on the private health insurance (PHI) status of individuals with and without a mental health problem, and examine whether PHI status is associated with access to psychological services. METHODS: This is a descriptive study of nationally representative population-based data collected in 2009 (HILDA) with participants aged 15–93 (n = 13,301). Key measures included: PHI status (categorised as 'hospital cover only', 'extras cover only', or 'both hospital and extras cover'); mental health status (categorised as 'have a mental health problem' or 'do not have a mental health problem' using the Mental Health Index (MHI) of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form); mental health service use (access to a mental health professional (psychologist/psychiatrist) in the past 12 months (categorised as 'yes' or 'no'). RESULTS: Individuals with a mental health problem were less likely to have PHI than those without a mental health problem. However, PHI was not associated with access to a mental health professional in the past 12 months. Conclusions: The findings suggest that while the discrepancy in PHI status is a marker of inequity between those with and without a mental health problem, it is not a key factor in facilitating access to mental health services. ; P. B. is supported by NHMRC Population Health Career Development Award Fellowship No. 525410. This paper uses unit record data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Leach et al. 475 Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 46(5) Australia (HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project was initiated and is funded by the Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) and is managed by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research (MIAESR). The findings and views reported in this paper, however, are those of the author and should not be attributed to either FaHCSIA or the MIAESR.