After a recent discussion about psychotherapy done in psychiatric treatment – I decided to write this post in order to capture the complexity of some of these sessions. I hope that this post serves multiple purposes including a demonstration about how business management affects psychiatric care and the range of services that people receive in psychiatric follow up appointments. The audience for this post will be people seeking psychiatric services, psychiatrists of all orientations, and anyone interested in quality psychiatric care.
The fundamental unit of psychiatric care comes down to what
tasks need to be completed in a set time frame and there are a lot of
variables. Rather than list those variables – it is probably easier to describe
a limited or rationed task scenario and compare that to an abundant task
scenario. Most peoples experience with
psychiatrists in the US will fall somewhere between the extremes. From a scheduling perspective there are no assurances that what a patient needs on a particular day will be the session they are scheduled for.
In the most limited care, the patient is seen for follow
up or “medication management”. These
visits developed as part of a coding scheme that suggested that psychiatrists
could see patients for very brief (5’-15’) periods of time with an exclusive
focus on the medication a person was taking, whether it was effective, and
whether they were experiencing any side effects. To speed up the process, many
clinics have templates that are rapid checklists of symptoms and side
effects. In some cases, as the patient
speaks the psychiatrist is checking off items on the list so that at the end of
the session, a couple of sentences can be typed and the note is complete. Depending
on the setting, additional information that might be acquired in the rooming
procedure during a standard medical appointment (like pulse and blood pressure)
may or may not be collected. Before psychiatrists started using standard
billing codes like the rest of medicine, there were codes that assumed this
limited care could be completed in anywhere from 5’-15’. As far as I know - no other medical specialty had codes that were as restrictive. In some clinics patients would be seen for
that period of time every 6 months. That
duration and frequency of medication focused visits might work well for some
people, but there is an understandable concern about quality when it is applied
on a population wide basis. That concern is amplified where patients have more
medical and psychiatric complexity (high risk for medical or psychiatric
complications).
At the other extreme, a psychiatrist may see a patient for
30-60 minutes in follow-up. A psychiatrist who typically sees people for 30
minutes would review the efficacy and side effects of any psychiatric
medication. They also may cover more
medical or neurological considerations and following another condition
like the patient’s problem with hypertension, diabetes, or neurological
conditions. In the remaining time, there
is a detailed discussion with the patient.
In the case of a 50'- 60’ appointment, the psychiatrist is most certainly
providing psychotherapy in addition to medical treatment. They may be providing
psychotherapy exclusively. Standard
billing codes can be used, there are also psychotherapy add on codes and a
separate psychotherapy code. Over the years, a lot has been written about the
financial incentive for seeing many more of the briefer visits per hour than
longer sessions involving psychotherapy. Practice setting tends to be the
overriding factor. If you are employed
in a clinic or hospital, there is some administrator telling you how many
people you need to see in a day. That
number is referred to as physician productivity.
There is a lot of confusion about what constitutes
psychotherapy. At its core, psychotherapy is a teaching experience where the
therapist attempts to assist the patient in solving problems that complicate
their psychiatric disorder or affect their ability to adapt to life situations. That can cover a lot of ground including
inflexible thought patterns, stressful relationships and current or past
stressors. It can also be a very focal problem that might require some
directive education like sleep hygiene, diet, and exercise modifications. The
teaching needs to occur in the context of a relationship that is both empathic
and collaborative. That collaboration is
often referred to as the therapeutic alliance to indicate that the
physician/therapist and the patient are aligned to focus on and resolve a
mutually agreed upon set of problems. The common view of psychotherapy is that
it needs to be long in duration and that the therapist “analyzes” the patient
during that time. That description comes from psychoanalytic therapy that is a very
specific therapy done be relatively few psychiatrists and it does not represent
most of the brief psychotherapy done in treatment sessions.
There has not been a lot of study of psychotherapy in
psychiatry in the real world. The best single study by Mojtabai and Olfson (1) and
it is the most often quoted. The most
notorious quote is:
“ …..third-party reimbursement for one 45- to 50-minute
outpatient psychotherapy session is 40.9% less than reimbursement for three
15-minute medication management visits.”
That led to the expected provocative articles about
psychiatrists abandoning psychotherapy or being too motivated by money. The reality of what it takes to keep a
practice open in the face of paltry reimbursement was never mentioned. Some
articles got so extreme they called for the end of psychiatry, replacing the
greedy psychiatrists with therapists trained to prescribe. The authors of the
article provide a much more balanced perspective including their opinion that
many psychiatrists were still providing some kind of therapy and that their
measures of what constituted therapy may have undercounted the therapy
provided.
Polarized viewpoints of what actually occurs when a
psychiatrist sees a patient probably described very little of what happens in
real life sessions. From working in various settings with psychiatrists of
three generations, there are many styles of practice and how psychotherapy is
integrated – even into very brief sessions.
I was fortunate enough to work with a psychiatrist who ran a clozapine
clinic and a separate clinic for long-acting injectable medications. Both clinics were probably the largest in the
state. He would typically see people in 20’-30’ appointments based on the
complexity of the care they needed on that particular day. He was an expert in
psychopharmacology and medicine as it applied to that patient population. But
more than that he was empathic and knew the relevant life details of all of his
patients. There was obviously a high degree of patient satisfaction and engagement
in treatment. One of the obvious markers of his success was patient interest in this physician after he made a career change. His former patients would approach me in the hallway and ask me how he was doing or if I had heard from him. They would talk about him in the most positive terms. I don't recall seeing that happen with any other psychiatrist who moved on.
Papers on the minimum time needed to provide a
psychotherapeutic encounter have been written for the past 40 years now. With
the advent of managed care – many of them emphasize how the rationing aspect
has reduced the time for both verbal and medical interventions. The latest guidelines
for residency training emphasize the need to learn psychotherapy but beyond
advanced interviewing techniques cognitive behavioral therapy or CBT seems to
be the predominate paradigm – even though residents are still exposed to a
variety of paradigms from their supervisors and mentors.
The best single paper I have found that describes the
psychotherapeutic aspect of medical treatment within the confines of a “medication
management” session and its considerable constraints was written in 2018 (2). The authors argue for the need for a human-to-human
connection consistent with the existential orientation in psychiatry in order
for treatment with medications to work. The
main features described are empathic listening and alliance building. One of
the primary ways they are realized in the sessions is a focus on the patients own description of the problems or progress.
As I read through this paper, I realized that I had been
conducting outpatient visits in this manner over the course of my career but
that nobody had previously described it in these terms or suggested why it had
been so successful. But even as I read
this brief paper – I realized that the description was incomplete. It did not
describe the many active psychotherapeutic interventions that I had used over
the years. I learned most of them as
supportive psychotherapy in residency and they include interventions that would
now be described as behavior therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, and brief
psychodynamic therapy and they all happened in the constraints of brief
sessions that were generally 20-30 minutes long – in addition to whatever I
needed to cover about the medications and other medical conditions.
These 20’-30’ sessions are currently No Man’s Land in
the field of psychiatry. It is easy to extremely pessimistic about them. As I previously noted they can be a political
football – since any bias can be projected onto them. That is probably why
there has been so little research in the area. It is as if the managed care and
CMS template for these codes is an inescapable reality. Everything on the
template is all that occurs in one of these sessions. I would propose a thought
experiment to counter. If you are a psychiatrist seeing patients in these
sessions and billing these codes – do you cover more information than what is
in the bullet points for these sessions? Is the patient predictable from
session to session – is more lengthy clarification needed? Are there any
sessions where the entire session has very little to do with medications? Are there any sessions dedicated to crisis intervention
and only verbal interactions about that crisis? Do you see family members
during these sessions and discuss their concerns? When you assess whether a person is experiencing suicidal thoughts do you know how to discuss them in a therapeutic manner? If the answer to any of these
questions is yes – it is highly likely that some form of psychotherapy is
happening – even if you do not consciously pull up a psychotherapy technique
that you learned and used in the past. That psychotherapy happens whether you decide to record it on a template or not.
I think this area requires a lot more study. The
information transfer between two people that can occur in 20’-30’ minutes is
vast – even if it is semi-structured. The first step is determining what really
happens in these brief sessions. If anyone does that study, I think
we will find out that the treatment that happens is much more than medication
management.
References:
1: Mojtabai R,
Olfson M. National trends in psychotherapy by office-based psychiatrists. Arch
Gen Psychiatry. 2008 Aug;65(8):962-70. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.65.8.962.
2: Ghaemi SN, Glick
ID, Ellison JM. A Commentary on Existential Psychopharmacologic Clinical
Practice: Advocating a Humanistic Approach to the "Med Check". J Clin
Psychiatry. 2018 Apr 24;79(4):18ac12177. doi: 10.4088/JCP.18ac12177.
Graphics Credit:
Photo by Eduardo Colon, MD