Publication date: Sep 20, 2023
The COVID-19 pandemic has tested global healthcare resilience. Many countries previously considered ‘resilient’ have performed poorly. Available organisational and system frameworks tend to be context-dependent and focus heavily on physical capacities. This study aims to explore and synthesise evidence about healthcare resilience and present a unified framework for future resilience-building. Systematic review and synthesis of reviews using a meta-narrative approach. Healthcare organisations and systems. Definitions, concepts and measures of healthcare resilience. We used thematic analysis across included reviews to summarise evidence on healthcare resilience. The main paradigms within healthcare resilience include global health, disaster risk reduction, emergency management, patient safety and public health. Definitions of healthcare resilience recognise various hierarchical levels: individual (micro), facility or organisation (meso), health system (macro) and planetary or international (meta). There has been a shift from a focus on mainly disasters and crises, to an ‘all-hazards’ approach to resilience. Attempts to measure resilience have met with limited success. We analysed key concepts to build a framework for healthcare resilience containing pre-event, intra-event, post-event and trans-event domains. Alongside, we synthesise a definition which dovetails with our framework. Resilience increasingly takes an all-hazards approach and a process-oriented perspective. There is increasing recognition of the relational aspects of resilience. Few frameworks incorporate these, and they are difficult to capture within measurement systems. We need to understand how resilience works across hierarchical levels, and how competing priorities may affect overall resilience. Understanding these will underpin interdisciplinary, cross-sectoral and multi-level approaches to healthcare resilience for the future. CRD42022314729.
Open Access PDF
| Concepts | Keywords |
|---|---|
| Competing | Hospitals |
| Covid | PUBLIC HEALTH |
| Crd42022314729 | QUALITATIVE RESEARCH |
| Healthcare | Systematic Review |
| Pandemic |
Semantics
| Type | Source | Name |
|---|---|---|
| disease | MESH | COVID-19 pandemic |
| disease | MESH | emergency |
| disease | IDO | facility |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Methionine |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Spinosad |
| disease | IDO | process |
| disease | MESH | infection |
| disease | VO | vaccine |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Tretamine |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Coenzyme M |
| disease | VO | protocol |
| disease | VO | volume |
| disease | IDO | quality |
| disease | MESH | shock |
| disease | IDO | country |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Etoperidone |
| disease | VO | time |
| disease | VO | frequency |
| disease | MESH | infectious diseases |
| disease | VO | effective |
| disease | MESH | sepsis |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Isoxaflutole |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Trestolone |
| disease | IDO | history |
| disease | VO | effectiveness |
| pathway | REACTOME | Translation |
| disease | VO | vaccination |
| disease | IDO | healthcare facility |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Pentaerythritol tetranitrate |
| disease | IDO | object |
| disease | VO | Canada |
| drug | DRUGBANK | Dimercaprol |
| disease | VO | report |
| disease | MESH | septic shock |