Intermediary Services to Assist People With Disabilities to Implement Individualized Funding Plans: A Rapid Systematic Review

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
L. O'Brien, Ivana Randjelovic
{"title":"Intermediary Services to Assist People With Disabilities to Implement Individualized Funding Plans: A Rapid Systematic Review","authors":"L. O'Brien, Ivana Randjelovic","doi":"10.1177/10442073221130529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A systematic review was conducted to describe, and evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of, intermediary services to support people with a disability to implement individualized funding plans. We included six records, including one subanalysis of randomized trial data, three qualitative studies, and two systematic reviews (reporting on 73 and 18 studies, respectively). No studies directly compared “consumer-directed plan plus intermediary services” to “consumer-directed plan with no/alternative intermediary,” so effectiveness of these interventions is uncertain. There is qualitative evidence from the perspective of disability planners and workers that intermediary interventions are important enablers of successful plan implementation. There is also qualitative evidence from consumer and family perspectives that external support is required to successfully navigate self-directed systems and that strong, trusting, and collaborative relationships with both paid and unpaid individuals in the person’s support network were facilitators of successful plan implementation. There was evidence of disabling practices and attitudes among some support agencies, resulting in coordinators being very risk averse in order to safeguard their clients. Suggestions for future research include carefully planned and ethically robust comparative trial designs, clear description and consistent delivery of interventions, and long-term evaluation of impact. The protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42020177607).","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073221130529","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A systematic review was conducted to describe, and evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of, intermediary services to support people with a disability to implement individualized funding plans. We included six records, including one subanalysis of randomized trial data, three qualitative studies, and two systematic reviews (reporting on 73 and 18 studies, respectively). No studies directly compared “consumer-directed plan plus intermediary services” to “consumer-directed plan with no/alternative intermediary,” so effectiveness of these interventions is uncertain. There is qualitative evidence from the perspective of disability planners and workers that intermediary interventions are important enablers of successful plan implementation. There is also qualitative evidence from consumer and family perspectives that external support is required to successfully navigate self-directed systems and that strong, trusting, and collaborative relationships with both paid and unpaid individuals in the person’s support network were facilitators of successful plan implementation. There was evidence of disabling practices and attitudes among some support agencies, resulting in coordinators being very risk averse in order to safeguard their clients. Suggestions for future research include carefully planned and ethically robust comparative trial designs, clear description and consistent delivery of interventions, and long-term evaluation of impact. The protocol was published on PROSPERO (CRD42020177607).
协助残疾人实施个性化资助计划的中介服务:快速系统回顾
进行了一次系统审查,以描述和评估支持残疾人实施个性化资助计划的中介服务的有效性和成本效益。我们纳入了六项记录,包括一项随机试验数据的亚分析、三项定性研究和两项系统综述(分别报告了73项和18项研究)。没有研究直接将“消费者导向计划加中介服务”与“没有/替代中介的消费者导向计划”进行比较,因此这些干预措施的有效性尚不确定。从残疾规划人员和工作人员的角度来看,有定性证据表明,中介干预措施是成功实施计划的重要推动者。从消费者和家庭的角度来看,也有定性证据表明,成功驾驭自我导向系统需要外部支持,与个人支持网络中的有偿和无偿个人建立牢固、信任和合作关系是成功实施计划的推动者。有证据表明,一些支持机构的做法和态度令人致残,导致协调员为了保护客户而非常厌恶风险。对未来研究的建议包括精心规划和道德稳健的比较试验设计、明确的干预措施描述和一致的实施,以及对影响的长期评估。该方案发表在PROSPERO上(CRD42020177607)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Disability Policy Studies addresses compelling, variable issues in ethics, policy, and law related to individuals with disabilities. A major focus is quantitative and qualitative policy research. Articles have implications in fields such as education, law, sociology, public health, family studies, medicine, social work, and public administration. Occasional special series discuss current problems or areas needing more in-depth research, for example, disability and aging, policy concerning families of children with disabilities, oppression and disability, school violence policies and interventions, and systems change in supporting individuals with disabilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信