IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p16225-d993194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects and Costs of Personalized Budgets for People with Disabilities: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Marguerite Robinson

    (Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER), 4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg)

  • Marie Blaise

    (Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER), 4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg)

  • Germain Weber

    (Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria)

  • Marc Suhrcke

    (Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER), 4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
    Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK)

Abstract

This article reviews the peer-reviewed and grey literature published from January 1985 to November 2022 that has quantitatively evaluated the effects of personalized budgets for people with disabilities (PwDs), in terms of a range of benefit and cost outcomes. Benefit metrics of interest comprised measures of well-being, service satisfaction and use, quality of life, health, and unmet needs. A search was conducted using the PsycINFO, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ASSIA, and Social Care Online databases. Based on inclusion criteria and a quality assessment using the Downs and Black Checklist, a final count of 23 studies were identified for in-depth review. Given the heterogeneous nature of the studies, a narrative synthesis, rather than a formal meta-analysis, was undertaken. Taking the relatively scarce and often methodologically limited evidence base at face value, the findings suggest that—overall—personalized budget users tend to benefit in terms of well-being and service satisfaction outcomes, with the exception of mixed effects for people with mental health conditions. Only a minority of studies have investigated the cost-effectiveness or costs-only of personalized budgets, finding mixed results. Two out of the three cost-effectiveness studies find personal budgets to be more cost-effective than alternative options, meaning that the possibly higher costs of personalized budgets may be more than outweighed by additional benefits. Some evidence looking at service use and/or costs only also points to significant reductions in certain service use areas, which at least hints at the potential that personalized budgeting may—in some cases—entail reduced costs. Further research is needed to explore the generalizability of these conclusions and to better capture and understand the factors driving the observed heterogeneity in some of the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Marguerite Robinson & Marie Blaise & Germain Weber & Marc Suhrcke, 2022. "The Effects and Costs of Personalized Budgets for People with Disabilities: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-31, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16225-:d:993194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16225/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/16225/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:mpr:mprres:4552 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:mpr:mprres:4573 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Stacy Dale & Randall Brown & Barbara Phillips, 2004. "Medicaid Costs Under Consumer Direction for Florida Children with Developmental Disabilities," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 25334662990e4154a8111e90e, Mathematica Policy Research.
    4. Pádraic Fleming & Sinead McGilloway & Marian Hernon & Mairead Furlong & Siobhain O'Doherty & Fiona Keogh & Tim Stainton, 2019. "Individualized funding interventions to improve health and social care outcomes for people with a disability: A mixed‐methods systematic review," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1-2), June.
    5. repec:mpr:mprres:5583 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:mpr:mprres:4800 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. repec:mpr:mprres:4180 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:mpr:mprres:4666 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Elisa Fontecedro & Morena Furlan & Davide Tossut & Elisabetta Pascolo-Fabrici & Matteo Balestrieri & Luis Salvador-Carulla & Barbara D’Avanzo & Giulio Castelpietra, 2020. "Individual Health Budgets in Mental Health: Results of Its Implementation in the Friuli Venezia Giulia Region, Italy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-16, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:mpr:mprres:5583 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Randall Brown & Barbara Lepidus Carlson & Stacy Dale & Leslie Foster & Barbara Phillips & Jennifer Schore, "undated". "Cash and Counseling: Improving the Lives of Medicaid Beneficiaries Who Need Personal Care or Home- and Community-Based Services," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 0818a138bf034a13b4eb2df8b, Mathematica Policy Research.
    3. Emma Motrico & Jose A. Salinas-Perez & Maria Luisa Rodero-Cosano & Sonia Conejo-Cerón, 2021. "Editors’ Comments on the Special Issue “Social Determinants of Mental Health”," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-9, April.
    4. repec:mpr:mprres:4613 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Stacy Dale & Randall Brown, "undated". "The Effect of Cash and Counseling on Medicaid and Medicare Costs: Findings for Adults in Three States," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 2a396245c28f4ce9a21daabac, Mathematica Policy Research.
    6. repec:mpr:mprres:4664 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Natasha Layton & Jackie O’Connor & Amy Fitzpatrick & Sharon Carey, 2022. "Towards Co-Design in Delivering Assistive Technology Interventions: Reconsidering Roles for Consumers, Allied Health Practitioners, and the Support Workforce," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Leslie Foster & Randall Brown & Rachel Shapiro, "undated". "Assessing the Appeal of the Cash and Counseling Demonstration in Arkansas, Florida, and New Jersey," Mathematica Policy Research Reports bca15fc19a2340aab8f3d57f4, Mathematica Policy Research.
    9. Kathy Boschen & Caroline Phelan & Sharon Lawn, 2022. "NDIS Participants with Psychosocial Disabilities and Life-Limiting Diagnoses: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-23, August.
    10. repec:mpr:mprres:4573 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Leslie Foster & Barbara Phillips & Jennifer Schore, "undated". "Consumer and Consultant Experiences in the New Jersey Personal Preference Program," Mathematica Policy Research Reports b01b328fefc04d9ba0dba6fbe, Mathematica Policy Research.
    12. Leslie Foster & Stacy Dale & Randall Brown & Barbara Phillips & Jennifer Schore & Barbara Lepidus Carlson, "undated". "Do Consumer-Directed Medicaid Supportive Services Work for Children with Developmental Disabilities?," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 0e69232620e04ef6ae5316c89, Mathematica Policy Research.
    13. Mac Domhnaill, Ciarán & Lyons, Seán & McCoy, Selina, 2020. "Specialist support for persons with disabilities living in the community: Review of international practice," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number SUSTAT97.
    14. repec:mpr:mprres:4180 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Leslie Foster & Barbara Phillips & Jennifer Schore, 2005. "Consumer and Consultant Experiences in the Florida Consumer Directed Care Program," Mathematica Policy Research Reports 97e194bd0e80406a97d9dbac9, Mathematica Policy Research.
    16. repec:mpr:mprres:4648 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:16225-:d:993194. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.