Health System Resilience: What Are We Talking About? A Scoping Review Mapping Characteristics and Keywords

The importance of organisational culture for health system resilience: A qualitative analysis of factors that supported health care workers in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic

Health system resilience is defined as the ability of a system to prepare, manage, and learn from shocks. This study investigates the resilience of the German health system by analysing the system-related factors that supported health care workers, a key building block of the system, during the COVID-19 pandemic. We thematically analysed data from 18 semi-structured interviews with key informants from management, policy and academia, 17 in-depth interviews with health care workers, and 10 focus group discussions with health care workers. We identified six categories of factors which supported health care workers during the pandemic: (1) appreciation and encouragement; (2) team support and communication; (3) collaboration across professions and institutions; (4) informational, material and technical support; (5) leadership and participation; and (6) creativity and innovation. The analysis highlights the importance of systemic and organisational factors for maintaining health system resilience. The need to improvise and develop pragmatic solutions to deal with COVID-related challenges offered ample opportunities for participation, self-determination, innovation, and alternative work processes. Learning from adaptations made during the pandemic and implementing sustainable organisational and systemic changes to increase participation, conducive organisational cultures, and non-hierarchical working styles hold promising potential for health system transformation and health system strengthening.

Health systems'resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A South African polio surveillance case study

BACKGROUND

More needs to be known on how the South African health system contained the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and maintained the core business of health service delivery. We describe the practices that have shown to affect the health systems' resilience in ensuring maintenance of polio surveillance and immunization systems in South Africa (SA) during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODOLOGY

This is a descriptive, reflective desk review study using the South African polio surveillance systems and immunization coverage as a case study. We applied a health systems' resilience framework to highlight how the South African health system contained the pandemic and maintained its core business. Routine immunization and polio surveillance data were obtained and analyzed.

RESULTS

The effect of SA's immunization campaigns, which contributed positively to maintaining the polio immunization coverage during the COVID-19 pandemic, is highlighted, with varied performances among provinces. We established delayed integration of pandemic services and missing public health emergency response structures, which led to redeployment of service providers compromising on the health systems' core business.

CONCLUSION

Immunization campaigns are key in maintaining coverage, with individualized approaches in supporting the provinces. The existing health systems' structures of countries are a critical determinant of response to pandemics regardless of the available resources. Therefore, to ensure that the health systems maintain a balance between containing pandemics like COVID-19 and maintaining its core business, we recommend the establishment of a public health structure from the national to the community level to respond to public health emergencies and the early integration of pandemic services into the day-to-day health systems' business.

Health system resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of disruptions in care from 32 countries

OBJECTIVE

To quantify disruptions in hospitalization and ambulatory care throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for 32 countries, and examine associations of health system characteristics and COVID-19 response strategies on disruptions.

DATA SOURCES

We utilized aggregated inpatient hospitalization and surgical procedure data from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Health Database from 2010 to 2021. Covariate data were extracted from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Health Database, World Health Organization, and Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a descriptive study using time-series analyses to quantify the annual effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-COVID-19 hospitalizations for 20 diagnostic categories and 15 surgical procedures. We compared expected hospitalizations had the pandemic never occurred in 2020-2021, estimated using autoregressive integrated moving average modeling with data from 2010 to 2019, with observed hospitalizations. Observed-to-expected ratios and missed hospitalizations were computed as measures of COVID-19 impact. Mixed linear models were employed to examine associations between hospitalization observed-to-expected ratios and covariates.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with 16,300,000 (95% uncertainty interval 14,700,000-17,900,000; 18.0% [16.5%-19.4%]) missed hospitalizations in 2020. Diseases of the respiratory (-2,030,000 [-2,300,000 to -1,780,000]), circulatory (-1,680,000 [-1,960,000 to -1,410,000]), and musculoskeletal (-1,480,000 [-1,720,000 to -1,260,000]) systems contributed most to the declines. In 2021, there were an additional 14,700,000 (95% uncertainty interval 13,100,000-16,400,000; 16.3% [14.9%-17.9%]) missed hospitalizations. Total healthcare workers per capita (β = 1.02 [95% CI 1.00, 1.04]) and insurance coverage (β = 1.05 [1.02, 1.09]) were associated with fewer missed hospitalizations. Stringency index (β = 0.98 [0.98, 0.99]) and excess all-cause deaths (β = 0.98 [0.96, 0.99]) were associated with more missed hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

There was marked cross-country variability in disruptions to hospitalizations and ambulatory care. Certain health system characteristics appeared to be more protective, such as insurance coverage, and number of inputs including healthcare workforce and beds.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

Substantial disruptions in health services associated with the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic have placed a renewed interest in health system resilience. While there is a growing body of evidence documenting disruptions in services, there are limited comparative assessments across diverse countries with different health system designs, preparedness levels, and public health responses. Learning and adapting from health system-specific gaps and challenges highlighted by the pandemic will be critical for improving resilience.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

All countries experienced disruptions to hospitalizations and surgical procedures with a combined total of 30 million missed hospitalizations and 4 million missed surgical procedures in 2020-2021, but there was marked cross-country heterogeneity in disruptions. Countries with greater baseline healthcare workers, insurance coverage, and hospital beds had disproportionately lower disruptions in care. National health planning discussions may need to balance health system resiliency and efficiency to avert preventable morbidity and mortality.

Exploring influential components and indicators in hospital resilience assessment: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Hospitals are vital infrastructures that provide health services during emergencies and disasters. However, in recent years, disasters have led to hospital losses and interruptions in medical services. Consequently, the concept of resilience has garnered significant attention. Despite extensive research, the lack of clarity in explaining hospital resilience poses challenges in effective assessment and identifying key priorities for enhancing disaster risk management. Recently, the WHO's Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) introduced a conceptual framework for the conceptualisation of hospital resilience, defining it through six interconnected components and four resilience capacities. Identifying specific indicators and characteristics for hospital resilience components based on the EMRO framework. This protocol outlines the method for conducting a scoping review to identify such indicators and characteristics to develop a comprehensive hospital resilience assessment tool.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This scoping review will adhere to the six-step protocol proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. It aims to comprehensively understand current knowledge about resilient hospital characteristics and identify effective components and indicators for assessing hospital resilience. The review will encompass available articles indexed in PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Additionally, searches will explore the grey literature on Google Scholar, the WHO's website and regional offices. There will be no publication date restrictions applied to the search. Quantitative and qualitative content analyses will assess and categorise the study results. Our protocol was drafted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols extension for scoping reviews.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol describes a scoping review within a doctoral thesis focused on health in emergencies and disasters, specifically hospital resilience. The study, associated with ethics code number (IR.USWR.REC.1402.120), aims to develop a comprehensive assessment tool for hospital resilience. Once peer-reviewed and published, the findings will inform experts, policymakers and relevant organisations in emergency and disaster management.

Intersectoral collaboration and health system resilience during COVID-19: learnings from Ahmedabad, India

Health system resilience refers to the capacity of a health system to effectively anticipate, assimilate, adjust to and recuperate from unforeseen disruptions and pressures. Evidence indicates that low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) have a double burden of dealing with the existing shortage of health resources in managing both non-emergency care and emergency care during epidemics. Intersectoral collaboration plays a pivotal role in managing crises such as pandemics. The World Health Organization has emphasized that effective intersectoral collaboration is vital for uninterrupted essential services during a pandemic. The study aimed to look at the collaborations entered into at various levels for managing the COVID-19 pandemic, taking as an example the municipal corporation in Ahmedabad, India. We undertook a qualitative study that involved conducting 52 in-depth interviews with officials from the health department, and other departments at the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC), including firefighting, estate, engineering and education, as well as private stakeholders. Many diverse observations were documented in this study as collaboration varied across the sectors. A lack of hospital beds and shortage of essential drugs and oxygen posed challenges for healthcare providers and provided an opportunity to collaborate with private stakeholders. Mandatory COVID testing and mobile units such as the Sanjivani van and Vadil ghar seva were examples of some of the initiatives taken by the AMC to manage the pandemic that were instigated and implemented with support from various departments such as education, engineering, tax, estate, animal husbandry and firefighting. Proper communication between public and private entities will result in unfragmented efforts to combat emergencies. Thus, a resilient health system is necessary as well as systematic intersectoral collaboration to ensure the uninterrupted delivery of essential health services during health emergencies.

Voices From the Frontline: A Reflexive Thematic Analysis Illuminating Perioperative Practice Realities in Southern Ethiopian Teaching Hospitals

Despite national efforts, gaps persist in Ethiopian perioperative care. This reflexive thematic analysis aimed to investigate the contextual challenges faced in delivering perioperative care. In-depth interviews were conducted with 20 healthcare professionals, including anesthetists, nurses, and surgeons, to gain a frontline perspective of perioperative practice realities. The analysis revealed eight interconnected themes: systemic infrastructure vulnerabilities, workforce expansion uncertainties, workforce demoralization, fragile perioperative safety culture, hierarchical structures and communication barriers, financial barriers to care, fragmented information systems, and fragile governance with sociopolitical instability. Local deficiencies in resources and equipment were amplified by global challenges, creating a precarious care environment. While workforce numbers increased, concerns persisted about competency and training quality. Systemic pressures and unmet professional needs contributed to staff demoralization. Inconsistent safety practices and top-down quality improvement initiatives hindered sustainable progress. Rigid hierarchies and departmental silos impeded effective teamwork and resource coordination. Financial constraints created significant barriers to care access and ethical dilemmas for providers. Incomplete digitalization and inconsistent documentation practices compromised continuity of care and data-driven improvements. Overarching sociopolitical instability and weak governance cascaded into healthcare system disruptions. The findings underscore the need for a multifaceted approach to strengthen perioperative care, including improving infrastructure, enhancing workforce development, fostering a culture of safety, breaking down hierarchical barriers, addressing financial accessibility, implementing robust information systems, and building resilient governance structures amidst adversity.

Facilitators of Organizational Resilience Within South Carolina AIDS Service Organizations: Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic

HIV care services have been interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic in many states in the U.S. including South Carolina (SC). However, many HIV care facilities demonstrated organizational resilience (i.e., the ability to maintain needed health services amid rapidly changing circumstances) by addressing challenges to maintaining care during the pandemic. This study, therefore, aims to identify key facilitators for organizational resilience among AIDS Services Organizations (ASOs) in SC. In-depth interviews were conducted among 11 leaders, from 8 ASOs, across SC during the summer of 2020. The interviews were recorded after receiving proper consent and then transcribed. Utilizing a codebook based upon the interview guide, a thematic analysis approach was utilized to analyze the data. All data management and analysis were conducted in NVivo 11.0. Our findings demonstrate several facilitators of organizational resilience, including (1) accurate and timely crisis information dissemination; (2) clear and preemptive protocols; (3) effective healthcare system policies, management, and leadership; (4) prioritization of staff psychological wellbeing; (5) stable access to personal protective equipment (PPE); (6) adequate and flexible funding; and (7) infrastructure that supports telehealth. Given the facilitators of organizational resilience among ASOs in SC during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is recommended that organizations implement and maintain coordinated and informed responses based upon preemptive protocols and emerging needs. ASO funders are encouraged to allow a flexibility in spending. The lessons learned from the participating leaders enable ASOs to develop and strengthen their organizational resilience and experience fewer disruptions in the future.

How Is Health System Resilience Being Assessed? A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

It is commonly argued that resilient health systems ensure the well-being of populations even under critical conditions, whereas poorly resilient ones may be disrupted and collapse. We aimed to examine how health system resilience can be assessed as this issue is still under debate.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature published up to March 2022, following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance. CAIRN, DOAJ, E-Journals, Global Health Google Scholar, MedRxiv, OAIster, PubMed, reliefWeb, ScienceDirect, SmartResilience, SSRN, and World Health Organization (WHO) library were searched. The search strategy was based on key words from the research question and validated by an experienced librarian. We included full reports in English and French, whose primary focus was the health system, and that proposed or reported on the use of approaches for assessing health system resilience. Three independent reviewers did the selection and charting of reports. Extraction of information from the 34 reports that met the inclusion criteria followed predefined charting items.

RESULTS

Various definitions of the concept of health system resilience and diverging conceptual bases were found for the assessment of resilience, pointing at the lack of conceptual maturity. Three assessment approaches emerged from this review: (1) the system mapping approach which looks at health system core functions, (2) the capacity-based approach which focuses on the main characteristics of resilience, and (3) the strategy-based approach which examines resilience strategies. None of these approaches gives a full picture of resilience. They can be complementary; hence they are increasingly used in combination.

CONCLUSION

This review identified three approaches to assessing health system resilience. The absence of a common understanding of what health system resilience represents still undermines its operationalisation and assessment. There is need for further testing and learning from empirical studies on the specific or integrated use of these frameworks.

The critical elements of the health system that could make for resilience in the World Health Organization African Region: a scoping review

Background

Unpredictable events, such as the outbreak of infectious diseases and humanitarian crises, are putting a strain on health care systems. As a result, African countries will need to prepare themselves with appropriate strategies to withstand such occurrences. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review was to map available evidence about what type and what components of health systems are needed to help countries cope with health emergencies and to foster health system resilience in the WHO African Region.

Methods

A systematic search was performed independently in Scopus and PubMed electronic databases as well as grey literature. Studies were selected based on set eligibility criteria based on the Joanna Brigg's Institute (JBI) methodology for scoping reviews. The key findings were focused on health system resilience and were mapped based on the WHO's core health system components. Our data were tabulated, and a narrative synthesis was conducted.

Results

A total of 28 studies were included in this scoping review, mostly conducted in the WHO African Region and region of the Americas. Studies focused on a variety of strategies, such as the continuous delivery of essential services, the strengthening of the health workforce, including community health care workers, community engagement, the provision of protective mechanisms for the health workforce, and flexible leadership and governance measures.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that strategies to improve health system resilience must include all areas of the healthcare delivery process, including primary care. A resilient health system should be ready for a crisis and have adaptable policies in place to offer adequate response at all levels, as well as post-recovery planning. Such health systems should also seek for continuous improvement. More research is needed to assess the efficacy of initiatives for improving health system resilience, particularly in vulnerable African health systems.

The effect of adaptive capacity on resilience to the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-country analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic's profound impacts on global health, driven by preparedness gaps and systemic risks, underscore the need to enhance societies' ability to manage both predictable risks and uncertainties inherent in disasters. While disaster research emphasises risk management for predictable threats and adaptive capacity for unexpected challenges, there is a lack of empirical examination of the impact of adaptive capacity on disaster resilience. This study addresses this gap by identifying three key adaptive capacities - quality of institutions, collaborative governance, and social capital - and examining their effects on COVID-19 resilience outcomes, measured by the ability to reduce excess mortality. Analysing secondary data from 129 nations using partial least squares structural equation modelling, the research finds significant positive effects of institutional quality and social capital on resilience outcomes. Conversely, collaborative governance shows a significant negative association, suggesting potentially intricate impacts beyond initial expectations. The findings highlight the need to enhance institutional quality and social capital to address preparedness gaps and unexpected challenges posed by biological hazards such as COVID-19. Future research should explore collaborative governance using a disaggregated approach that considers the roles of different stakeholders in various disaster phases.

Contribution

This study advances disaster research by presenting practical methodologies for operationalising adaptive capacities and empirically examining their effects on disaster resilience. For practitioners and policymakers, it highlights the need to adopt a long-term perspective in building disaster resilience, focussing on improving institutional quality and social capital to manage the uncertainties and complexities inherent in disaster scenarios effectively.

Evidence of health system resilience in primary health care for preventing under-five mortality in Rwanda and Bangladesh: Lessons from an implementation study during the Millennium Development Goal period and the early period of COVID-19

Background

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to disruptions of health service delivery in many countries; some were more resilient in either limiting or rapidly responding to the disruption than others. We used mixed methods implementation research to understand factors and strategies associated with resiliency in Rwanda and Bangladesh, focussing on how evidence-based interventions targeting amenable under-five mortality that had been used during the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) period (2000-15) were maintained during the early period of COVID-19.

Methods

We triangulated data from three sources - a desk review of available documents, existing quantitative data on evidence-based intervention coverage, and key informant interviews - to perform a comparative analysis using multiple case studies methodology, comparing contextual factors (barriers or facilitators), implementation strategies (existing from 2000-15, new, or adapted), and implementation outcomes across the two countries. We also analysed which health system resiliency capabilities were present in the two countries.

Results

Both countries experienced many of the same facilitators for resiliency of evidence-based interventions for children under five, as well as new, pandemic-specific barriers during the early COVID-19 period (March to December 2020) that required targeted implementation strategies in response. Common facilitators included leadership and governance and a culture of accountability, while common barriers included movement restrictions, workload, and staff shortages. We saw a continuity of implementation strategies that had been associated with success in care delivery during the MDG period, including data use for monitoring and decision-making, as well as building on community health worker programmes for community-based health care delivery. New or adapted strategies used in responding to new barriers included the expanded use of digital platforms. We found implementation outcomes and strong resilience capabilities, including awareness and adaptiveness, which were related to pre-existing facilitators and implementation strategies (continued and new).

Conclusions

The strategies and contextual factors Rwanda and Bangladesh leveraged to build 'everyday resilience' before COVID-19, i.e. during the MDG period, likely supported the maintained delivery of the evidence-based interventions targeting under-five mortality during the early stages of the pandemic. Expanding our understanding of pre-existing factors and strategies that contributed to resilience before and during the pandemic is important to support other countries' efforts to incorporate 'everyday resilience' into their health systems.

Maintaining health service during COVID-19: A study on regional health services

The pandemic has inevitably led to disruptions in the provision of health services for all those patients not affected by COVID-19. At the same time, we have observed differences among health services in their ability to maintain their activities in the face of shocks: while some health services were largely able to ensure core functions, other suffered delays in prevention, acute care, and rehabilitation. In this paper, we explore the effect of regional health policies in terms of governance, workforce, and health service delivery on the ability to maintain oncological services during the COVID-19 pandemic to assess the resilience of the system. The study is based on secondary data collected on the 21 Italian regional health services during the first wave of the pandemic. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of providing health services with specific characteristics pertaining to governance, workforce, and health service delivery to support the resilience of regional health policies during a crisis or shock.

Healthcare team resilience during COVID-19: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Resilience, in the field of Resilience Engineering, has been identified as the ability to maintain the safety and the performance of healthcare systems and is aligned with the resilience potentials of anticipation, monitoring, adaptation, and learning. In early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic challenged the resilience of US healthcare systems due to the lack of equipment, supply interruptions, and a shortage of personnel. The purpose of this qualitative research was to describe resilience in the healthcare team during the COVID-19 pandemic with the healthcare team situated as a cognizant, singular source of knowledge and defined by its collective identity, purpose, competence, and actions, versus the resilience of an individual or an organization.

METHODS

We developed a descriptive model which considered the healthcare team as a unified cognizant entity within a system designed for safe patient care. This model combined elements from the Patient Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) and the Advanced Team Decision Making (ADTM) models. Using a qualitative descriptive design and guided by our adapted model, we conducted individual interviews with healthcare team members across the United States. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis and extracted codes were organized within the adapted model framework.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified from the interviews with acute care professionals across the US (N = 22): teamwork in a pressure cooker, consistent with working in a high stress environment; healthcare team cohesion, applying past lessons to present challenges, congruent with transferring past skills to current situations; knowledge gaps, and altruistic behaviors, aligned with sense of duty and personal responsibility to the team. Participants' described how their ability to adapt to their environment was negatively impacted by uncertainty, inconsistent communication of information, and emotions of anxiety, fear, frustration, and stress. Cohesion with co-workers, transferability of skills, and altruistic behavior enhanced healthcare team performance.

CONCLUSION

Working within the extreme unprecedented circumstances of COVID-19 affected the ability of the healthcare team to anticipate and adapt to the rapidly changing environment. Both team cohesion and altruistic behavior promoted resilience. Our research contributes to a growing understanding of the importance of resilience in the healthcare team. And provides a bridge between individual and organizational resilience.

Concept analysis of health system resilience

BACKGROUND

There are several definitions of resilience in health systems, many of which share some characteristics, but no agreed-upon framework is universally accepted. Here, we review the concept of resilience, identifying its definitions, attributes, antecedents and consequences, and present the findings of a concept analysis of health system resilience.

METHODS

We follow Schwarz-Barcott and Kim's hybrid model, which consists of three phases: theoretical, fieldwork and final analysis. We identified the concept definitions, attributes, antecedents and consequences of health system resilience and constructed an evidence-informed framework on the basis of the findings of this review. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL Complete, EBSCOhost-Academic Search and Premier databases and downloaded identified titles and abstracts on Covidence. We screened 3357 titles and removed duplicate and ineligible records; two reviewers then screened each title, and disagreements were resolved by discussion with the third reviewer. From the 130 eligible manuscripts, we identified the definitions, attributes, antecedents and consequences using a pre-defined data extraction form.

RESULTS

Resilience antecedents are decentralization, available funds, investments and resources, staff environment and motivation, integration and networking and finally, diversification of staff. The attributes are the availability of resources and funds, adaptive capacity, transformative capacity, learning and advocacy and progressive leadership. The consequences of health system resilience are improved health system performance, a balanced governance structure, improved expenditure and financial management of health and maintenance of health services that support universal health coverage (UHC) throughout crises.

CONCLUSION

A resilient health system maintains quality healthcare through times of crisis. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, several seemingly robust health systems were strained under the increased demand, and services were disrupted. As such, elements of resilience should be integrated into the functions of a health system to ensure standardized and consistent service quality and delivery. We offer a systematic, evidence-informed method for identifying the attributes of health system resilience, intending to eventually be used to develop a measuring tool to evaluate a country's health system resilience performance.

Practical strategies to achieve resilient health systems: results from a scoping review

BACKGROUND

This paper presents the results of a systematic review to identify practical strategies to create the institutions, skills, values, and norms that will improve health systems resilience.

METHODS

A PRISMA 2020 compliant systematic review identified peer-reviewed and gray literature on practical strategies to make health systems more resilient. Investigators screened 970 papers to identify 65 English language papers published since 2015.

RESULTS

Practical strategies focus efforts on system changes to improve a health system's resilience components of collective knowing, collective thinking, and collaborative doing. The most helpful studies identified potential lead organizations to serve as the stewards of resilience improvement, and these were commonly in national and local departments of public health. Papers on practical strategies suggested possible measurement tools to benchmark resilience components in efforts to focus on performance improvement and ways to sustain their use. Essential Public Health Function (EPHF) measurement and improvement tools are well-aligned to the resilience agenda. The field of health systems resilience lacks empirical trials linking resilience improvement interventions to outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The rigorous assessment of practical strategies to improve resilience based on cycles of measurement should be a high priority.

Covid-19 vaccination: a mixed methods analysis of health system resilience in Latin America

BACKGROUND

This paper discusses the stages of health system resilience (HSR) and the factors underlying differences in HSR during the covid-19 pandemic, especially the vaccination challenge. We studied the relationship between vaccination strategies and macro-context backgrounds in 21 Latin American countries. Our objective was to capture the impact of those aspects in the SR and identify potential improvements for future crises and for vaccination programs in general.

METHODS

The study uses mixed-methods research to provide insights into how the countries' backgrounds and vaccination strategies impact the HSR. Particularly, we used explanatory sequential mixed methods, which entails a quantitative-qualitative two-phase sequence. The quantitative phase was conducted using cluster and variance analysis, in which the HSR was measured using as a proxy the covid-19 vaccination outcomes in three cut-offs of reaching 25%, 50%, and 75% of population coverage. This approach allows us to discriminate covid-19 vaccination progress by stages and contrast it to the qualitative stage, in which we performed a country-case analysis of the background conditions and the changes in vaccination strategies that occurred during the corresponding dates.

RESULTS

The paper provides a rich comparative case analysis of countries, classifying them by early, prompt, and delayed performers. The results show that differences in vaccination performance are due to flexibility in adapting strategies, cooperation, and the ability to design multilevel solutions that consider the needs of various actors in the health ecosystem. These differences vary depending on the vaccination stage, which suggests the importance of acknowledging learning, diffusion, and feedback processes at the regional level.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified the importance of societal well-being as an ideal country antecedent for high and sustained levels of performance in covid-19 vaccination. Whereas in other countries where the set-up and beginning phases were rough, the value of the operational decisions and the learning on the move regarding their own and their peers' trajectories were crucial and were reflected in performance improvement. A contribution of this study is that the above-mentioned analysis was done using vaccination coverage cut-off points that allow a performance view that takes into consideration the stages of the vaccination progress and the learning process that goes with it. As well as framing this into the HSR shock cycles that allow to differentiate the stages of resilience on which countries must act.

The trade-off between health system resiliency and efficiency: evidence from COVID-19 in European regions

The objective of this paper was to investigate the existence of a trade-off between health system resilience and the economic efficiency of the health system, using data for 173 regions in the European Union and the European Free Trade Association countries. Data Envelopment Analysis was used to measure the efficiency of regional health systems before the COVID-19 pandemic. Then, a spatial econometrics model was used to estimate whether this measure of efficiency, adjusted for several covariates, has a significant impact on regional health system resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic, measured by the number of COVID-19 deaths per hundred thousand inhabitants. The results show that COVID-19 death rates were significantly higher in regions with higher population density, higher share of employment in industry, and higher share of women in the population. Results also show that regions with higher values of the health system efficiency index in 2017 had significantly higher rates of COVID-19 deaths in 2020 and 2021, suggesting the existence of a trade-off between health system efficiency and health system resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Health systems resilience in fragile and conflict-affected settings: a systematic scoping review

BACKGROUND

Health systems resilience (HSR) research is a rapidly expanding field, in which key concepts are discussed and theoretical frameworks are emerging with vibrant debate. Fragile and conflict-affected settings (FCAS) are contexts exposed to compounding stressors, for which resilience is an important characteristic. However, only limited evidence has been generated in such settings. We conducted a scoping review to: (a) identify the conceptual frameworks of HSR used in the analysis of shocks and stressors in FCAS; (b) describe the representation of different actors involved in health care governance and service provision in these settings; and (c) identify health systems operations as they relate to absorption, adaptation, and transformation in FCAS.

METHODS

We used standard, extensive search methods. The search captured studies published between 2006 and January 2022. We included all peer reviewed and grey literature that adopted a HSR lens in the analysis of health responses to crises. Thematic analysis using both inductive and deductive approaches was conducted, adopting frameworks related to resilience characteristics identified by Kruk et al., and the resilience capacities described by Blanchet et al. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met our inclusion criteria. The governance-centred, capacity-oriented framework for HSR emerged as the most frequently used lens of analysis to describe the health responses to conflict and chronic violence specifically. Most studies focused on public health systems' resilience analysis, while the private health sector is only examined in complementarity with the former. Communities are minimally represented, despite their widely acknowledged role in supporting HSR. The documentation of operations enacting HSR in FCAS is focused on absorption and adaptation, while transformation is seldom described. Absorptive, adaptive, and transformative interventions are described across seven different domains: safety and security, society, health system governance, stocks and supplies, built environment, health care workforce, and health care services.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings suggest that the governance-centred framework can be useful to better understand HSR in FCAS. Future HSR research should document adaptive and transformative strategies that advance HSR, particularly in relation to actions intended to promote the safety and security of health systems, the built environment for health, and the adoption of a social justice lens.

Developing hospital resilience domains in facing disruption era in Indonesia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The studies of hospital resilience have been of increasing importance during the last decade due to disasters and pandemics. However, studies in developing the domain and indicators of hospital resilience were limited mainly on disaster response. A few studies of hospital resilience focused on how to deal with disruptions such as environmental turbulence, rapid technological changes, and changes in patient preferences. This study aims to develop domains and indicators of hospital resilience in facing the disruption era.

METHODS

This qualitative study focused on exploring the domains and indicators to face disruptions that have been identified in the first exploratory phase of the studies. Key informants included hospital experts from the government, medical practitioners, and academics. A total of 20 key informants were involved in semi-structured interviews which were conducted face-to-face, via telephone and Zoom. Data was analyzed using a grounded theory approach to discover domains for a resilient hospital.

RESULTS

The study identified a number of domains that are fundamental for a hospital to become a resilient in the face of disruption. These include readiness to face digital transformation, effective leadership, and flexibility in managing resources among others. Situation awareness and resilience ethos, implementation of marketing management, networking, and disaster anticipation are found to be equally important. These domains focused on the hospital's ability to deal with specific shocks from different perspectives as the result of changes from disruptions which are inevitable within the organizational business environment.

CONCLUSIONS

The domains identified in the study are able to respond to the limitations of the concept of hospital resilience, which is currently more focused on hospital disaster resilience. They can be used to measure hospital resilience in the context of the volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA), which are relevant to the context of the Indonesia hospital industry.

Conditions for health system resilience in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Mauritania

INTRODUCTION

A country's ability to manage a crisis depends on its level of resilience. Efforts are made to clarify the concept of health system resilience, but its operationalisation remains little studied. In the present research, we described the capacity of the local healthcare system in the Islamic Republic of Mauritania, in West Africa, to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We used a single case study with two health districts as units of analysis. A context analysis, a literature review and 33 semi-structured interviews were conducted. The data were analysed using a resilience conceptual framework.

RESULTS

The analysis indicates a certain capacity to manage the crisis, but significant gaps and challenges remain. The management of many uncertainties is largely dependent on the quality of the alignment of decision-makers at district level with the national level. Local management of COVID-19 in the context of Mauritania's fragile healthcare system has been skewed to awareness-raising and a surveillance system. Three other elements appear to be particularly important in building a resilient healthcare system: leadership capacity, community dynamics and the existence of a learning culture.

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic has put a great deal of pressure on healthcare systems. Our study has shown the relevance of an in-depth contextual analysis to better identify the enabling environment and the capacities required to develop a certain level of resilience. The translation into practice of the skills required to build a resilient healthcare system remains to be further developed.

Preparedness, impacts, and responses of public health emergencies towards health security: qualitative synthesis of evidence

BACKGROUND

Natural and human-made public health emergencies (PHEs), such as armed conflicts, floods, and disease outbreaks, influence health systems including interruption of delivery and utilization of health services, and increased health service needs. However, the intensity and types of impacts of these PHEs vary across countries due to several associated factors. This scoping review aimed to synthesise available evidence on PHEs, their preparedness, impacts, and responses.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of published evidence. Studies were identified using search terms related to two concepts: health security and primary health care. We used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to select studies. We adapted the review framework of Arksey and O'Malley. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach and explained under three stages of PHEs: preparedness, impacts, and responses.

RESULTS

A total of 64 studies were included in this review. Health systems of many low- and middle-income countries had inadequate preparedness to absorb the shocks of PHEs, limited surveillance, and monitoring of risks. Health systems have been overburdened with interrupted health services, increased need for health services, poor health resilience, and health inequities. Strategies of response to the impact of PHEs included integrated services such as public health and primary care, communication and partnership across sectors, use of digital tools, multisectoral coordination and actions, system approach to responses, multidisciplinary providers, and planning for resilient health systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Public health emergencies have high impacts in countries with weak health systems, inadequate preparedness, and inadequate surveillance mechanisms. Better health system preparedness is required to absorb the impact, respond to the consequences, and adapt for future PHEs. Some potential response strategies could be ensuring need-based health services, monitoring and surveillance of post-emergency outbreaks, and multisectoral actions to engage sectors to address the collateral impacts of PHEs. Mitigation strategies for future PHEs could include risk assessment, disaster preparedness, and setting digital alarm systems for monitoring and surveillance.

A resilience view on health system resilience: a scoping review of empirical studies and reviews

BACKGROUND

Prompted by recent shocks and stresses to health systems globally, various studies have emerged on health system resilience. Our aim is to describe how health system resilience is operationalised within empirical studies and previous reviews. We compare these to the core conceptualisations and characteristics of resilience in a broader set of domains (specifically, engineering, socio-ecological, organisational and community resilience concepts), and trace the different schools, concepts and applications of resilience across the health literature.

METHODS

We searched the Pubmed database for concepts related to 'resilience' and 'health systems'. Two separate analyses were conducted for included studies: a total of n = 87 empirical studies on health system resilience were characterised according to part of health systems covered, type of threat, resilience phase, resilience paradigm, and approaches to building resilience; and a total of n = 30 reviews received full-text review and characterised according to type of review, resilience concepts identified in the review, and theoretical framework or underlying resilience conceptualisation.

RESULTS

The intersection of health and resilience clearly has gained importance in the academic discourse with most papers published since 2018 in a variety of journals and in response to external threats, or in reference to more frequent hospital crisis management. Most studies focus on either resilience of health systems generally (and thereby responding to an external shock or stress), or on resilience within hospitals (and thereby to regular shocks and operations). Less attention has been given to community-based and primary care, whether formal or informal. While most publications do not make the research paradigm explicit, 'resilience engineering' is the most prominent one, followed by 'community resilience' and 'organisational resilience'. The social-ecological systems roots of resilience find the least application, confirming our findings of the limited application of the concept of transformation in the health resilience literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that the field is fragmented, especially in the use of resilience paradigms and approaches from non-health resilience domains, and the health system settings in which these are used. This fragmentation and siloed approach can be problematic given the connections within and between the complex and adaptive health systems, ranging from community actors to local, regional, or national public health organisations to secondary care. Without a comprehensive definition and framework that captures these interdependencies, operationalising, measuring and improving resilience remains challenging.

Healthcare resilience: a meta-narrative systematic review and synthesis of reviews

OBJECTIVES

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.

DESIGN

Systematic review and synthesis of reviews using a meta-narrative approach.

SETTING

Healthcare organisations and systems.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Definitions, concepts and measures of healthcare resilience. We used thematic analysis across included reviews to summarise evidence on healthcare resilience.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSION

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.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022314729.

Identification of behavioural changes in reporting adverse events early during COVID-19: An ambulatory care perspective in Israel

This study examined adverse event reporting centred on three significant dates in the months before the pandemic arrived in Israel. On these dates, broad media coverage exposed citizens and health care providers with indications about the forthcoming pandemic. The current study tracked whether parameters related to reporting adverse medical events provided early indications that a large crisis was unfolding. The method for analysing the data was based on a statistical test called Regression Discontinuity Design, which helped identify parameters related to medical reporting patterns which significantly changed. The examination indicated nurses' reports were unique in relation to others and indicated three phases: (1) upon declaration of the upcoming pandemic, there was a rise in reporting; (2) when the disease was named, there was moderation and maintenance in a steady quantity of reports, and finally, (3) when the first case arrived in Israel, a slight decrease in reporting began. Nurses' behaviours manifested as changes in reporting patterns. In this process of increase, moderation and decrease, it can be concluded that these are three stages that may characterise the beginning of a large event. The research method presented reinforces the need for forming tools by which significant events such as the COVID-19 pandemic can be identified quickly, and aid in proper planning of resources, optimise staffing and maximise utilization of the health systems.

Health System Performance and Resilience in Times of Crisis: An Adapted Conceptual Framework

With the COVID-19 pandemic, the notion of health system (HS) performance has been discussed, and the notion of resilience has become increasingly important. Lacking a recognised framework that measures the performance of HSs throughout a crisis, i.e., one that explicitly includes time as a key aspect, we examined the literature about conceptual frameworks for measuring the performance and the resilience of HSs. This review highlighted a significant diversity among 18 distinct HS performance frameworks and 13 distinct HS resilience frameworks. On this basis, we developed a model that integrates the WHO's widely recognised six building block framework in a novel approach derived from the European Observatory on HSs and Policies. The resulting framework adapts the building blocks to the different stages of a crisis, thereby allowing for a comprehensive assessment of an entire health system's performance throughout the crisis's duration, while also considering the key aspect of resilience. For a more pragmatic use of this framework in the future, indicators will be developed as a next step.

The rise of resilient healthcare research during COVID-19: scoping review of empirical research

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented many multi-faceted challenges to the maintenance of service quality and safety, highlighting the need for resilient and responsive healthcare systems more than ever before. This review examined empirical investigations of Resilient Health Care (RHC) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic with the aim to: identify key areas of research; synthesise findings on capacities that develop RHC across system levels (micro, meso, macro); and identify reported adverse consequences of the effort of maintaining system performance on system agents (healthcare workers, patients).

METHODS

Three academic databases were searched (Medline, EMBASE, Scopus) from 1st January 2020 to 30th August 2022 using keywords pertaining to: systems resilience and related concepts; healthcare and healthcare settings; and COVID-19. Capacities that developed and enhanced systems resilience were synthesised using a hybrid inductive-deductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty publications were included in this review. Consistent with previous research, studies from high-income countries and the use of qualitative methods within the context of hospitals, dominated the included studies. However, promising developments have been made, with an emergence of studies conducted at the macro-system level, including the development of quantitative tools and indicator-based modelling approaches, and the increased involvement of low- and middle-income countries in research (LMIC). Concordant with previous research, eight key resilience capacities were identified that can support, develop or enhance resilient performance, namely: structure, alignment, coordination, learning, involvement, risk awareness, leadership, and communication. The need for healthcare workers to constantly learn and make adaptations, however, had potentially adverse physical and emotional consequences for healthcare workers, in addition to adverse effects on routine patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified an upsurge in new empirical studies on health system resilience associated with COVID-19. The pandemic provided a unique opportunity to examine RHC in practice, and uncovered emerging new evidence on RHC theory and system factors that contribute to resilient performance at micro, meso and macro levels. These findings will enable leaders and other stakeholders to strengthen health system resilience when responding to future challenges and unexpected events.

Health System Transformation Playbook and Unified Care Model: an integrated design, systems & complexity thinking approach to health system transformation

Health system transformation is a complex journey that often results in unintended consequences. Existing methods to drive health system transformation have intrinsic limitations which impede successful implementation in local contexts. The Health System Transformation Playbook is a design-, systems-, and complexity-thinking enabled methodology to systematically design, prioritize and test health system and services transformation actions, anchored on iterative story telling, model building and pathfinding processes that tackles the scale of socially and technologically complex adaptive systems through time. The Unified Care Model and its associated cascade of models are examples of ongoing application of Health System Transformation Playbook in a regional population health system in Singapore. Use of Health System Transformation Playbook enables stewards of health systems to gain a more systematic and coherent understanding of health systems and services planning and organization development, to accelerate transformation towards people-centered, integrated and value-driven health systems.

Resilience of front-line facilities during COVID-19: evidence from cross-sectional rapid surveys in eight low- and middle-income countries

Responsive primary health-care facilities are the foundation of resilient health systems, yet little is known about facility-level processes that contribute to the continuity of essential services during a crisis. This paper describes the aspects of primary health-care facility resilience to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in eight countries. Rapid-cycle phone surveys were conducted with health facility managers in Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Chad, Guatemala, Guinea, Liberia, Malawi and Nigeria between August 2020 and December 2021. Responses were mapped to a validated health facility resilience framework and coded as binary variables for whether a facility demonstrated capacity in eight areas: removing barriers to accessing services, infection control, workforce, surge capacity, financing, critical infrastructure, risk communications, and medical supplies and equipment. These self-reported capacities were summarized nationally and validated with the ministries of health. The analysis of service volume data determined the outcome: maintenance of essential health services. Of primary health-care facilities, 1,453 were surveyed. Facilities maintained between 84% and 97% of the expected outpatient services, except for Bangladesh, where 69% of the expected outpatient consultations were conducted between March 2020 and December 2021. For Burkina Faso, Chad, Guatemala, Guinea and Nigeria, critical infrastructure was the largest constraint in resilience capabilities (47%, 14%, 51%, 9% and 29% of facilities demonstrated capacity, respectively). Medical supplies and equipment were the largest constraints for Liberia and Malawi (15% and 48% of facilities demonstrating capacity, respectively). In Bangladesh, the largest constraint was workforce and staffing, where 44% of facilities experienced moderate to severe challenges with human resources during the pandemic. The largest constraints in facility resilience during COVID-19 were related to health systems building blocks. These challenges likely existed before the pandemic, suggesting the need for strategic investments and reforms in core capacities of comprehensive primary health-care systems to improve resilience to future shocks.

Psychotropic drugs consumption during 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns: Evidence of a surprising resilience of the drugs delivery system in France

The COVID-19 pandemic imposed two lockdowns of eight and six weeks in France. While access to care was reduced during lockdown periods, these stressful situations with the pandemic and lockdown periods may have a negative impact on mental health, especially in vulnerable subgroups. Monitoring of psychotropic drugs consumption in France is a comprehensive and reliable tool for indirectly analyzing the mental health of French people. This historical cohort study (n = 767 147) investigated the short-term and long-term evolution of the weekly trend of psychotropic drugs users in 2020 by performing a Seasonal Trend decomposition time series analysis. Rate of progression of consumers per week increased from 186 in the last week of 2019 to 261 per week in the last week of 2020 (+40.3%). Our results did not show a significant break in psychotropic drugs consumption trends during the year 2020 and its two lockdowns. The increase in trend regarding psychotropic drugs consumptions was greatest in young people (<15 years) and patients not being socially deprived. Despite the increase in consumers with restrictive health measures, the French drugs delivery system has been able to adapt with the support of government and pharmacy network. This point should be kept in mind as the necessary reforms to the health care system are undertaken. The COVID-19 pandemic has a negative impact on mental health and two lockdowns occurred in France with reduced access to care. In this context, monitoring of psychotropic drugs consumption is a comprehensive and reliable tool for analyzing the mental health of French people. We hypothesized that the psychotropic drugs consumption has increased during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, testifying to French people mental health deterioration, with psychotropic drugs consumption breaks during lockdowns, especially during the first "grand national lockdown", due to the closure or difficulties for accessing to health care structures. By carrying out a historical cohort study among Pays de la Loire residents (n = 767 147), we investigated evolution of the weekly trend of psychotropic drugs users in 2020 compared to 2019 by performing a Seasonal Trend decomposition time series analysis. Between 2019 to 2020, we found a + 40.3% rate of progression of consumers per week. During the year 2020, changes in trend regarding psychotropic drugs consumptions was observed in various sub-groups, e.g. greater in the youngest (< 15 years), which may indicate a vulnerable group strongly impacted by COVID-19 negative consequences, and patients not being socially deprived, which may indicate a group with probably an easier access to care. Lockdown periods were not associated with a significant change in psychotropic drug use, suggesting a form of resilience in the French health care system to maintain its capacity to deliver psychotropic treatments. We mainly discussed that despite the increase in consumers and the policies of restricting access to care during lockdown periods, the French drugs delivery system has been able to adapt thanks to supportive policy actions (extension of the prescriptions validity without the need for a renewal by a physician during periods of lockdowns), an efficient pharmacy network with a collaborative practice of health actors that need to be developed and/or conserved to face potential future health crises.

Strategies for maintaining and strengthening the health care workers during epidemics: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

During epidemics such as COVID-19, healthcare workers (HCWs) face several challenges, leading to a shortage and weakening of human resources. To address this issue, employing effective strategies is essential in maintaining and strengthening human resources during outbreaks. This study aimed to gather and classify strategies that could retain and strengthen human health resources during epidemics.

METHODS

In this scoping review, all studies published about strategies for maintaining and strengthening HCWs in epidemics were collected from 4 international databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. The English language articles published after 2000 up until June 2022 recommended specific strategies regarding the research question. Then, they were analyzed and classified according to thematic analysis based on Braun and Clarke 6 phases protocols.

RESULTS

In total, 9405 records were screened, of which 59 articles were included, and their full texts were reviewed. Fifty factors were identified and classified into five themes: Instruction, Protection, Supporting, Caring, and Communication. Most of the suggestions were conducted in high-income countries and related to the Supporting theme.

DISCUSSION

The majority of strategies discussed in the literature addressed only one or two aspects of human resources. This study provides a holistic perspective on these issues by providing a thematic map of different strategies for strengthening and maintaining HCWs during epidemics. Considering the multidimensionality of human nature, it is suggested that policymakers and managers of health systems provide facilities that simultaneously address a wide range of needs.

Coaching to strengthen critical success factors in integrative care for chronic fatigue patients: the Patient Needs-Resources Model

Theoretical and empirical studies discover that an integrative approach is particularly important in chronic disorders and multiple long-term conditions, such as chronic fatigue. Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a classic example of a potentially severe, multisystemic illness with a wide diversity of symptoms and the corresponding diagnostic complexity. The prevalence of CFS-like syndromes expanded in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the disorder and treatment burden. Thus, this article aimed to draw attention to the possibilities to strengthen the integrative approach to diagnosing and treating chronic disorders and multiple long-term conditions. The main critical success factors identified for integrative approaches were: a holistic approach, that provides a more comprehensive diagnostic and personalized treatment strategy, a multidisciplinary team, and patient engagement. The strengths and weaknesses of these factors were explored and coaching was identified as a potential unifying and reinforcing element. Coaching has a wide spectrum of manifestations clearly representing a holistic approach, that has been successfully used in multidisciplinary team building. Moreover, coaching exposes support addressing the patient engagement issues identified by the Patient Needs-Resources Model (PN-R Model) such as low levels of self-efficacy, optimism, and subjective well-being. Coaching may assist patients to identify and prioritize their goals, becoming aware of their personal resources, developing strategies for managing symptoms, and building skills to increase their self-efficacy and active engagement in the treatment process. Therefore, the authors emphasize coaching as a perspective element of optimization of patient care, that requires additional theoretical and long-term empirical research.

A management perspective on resilience in healthcare: a framework and avenues for future research

Recent major health shocks, such as the 2014-16 Ebola, the Zika outbreak, and, last but not least, the COVID-19 pandemic, have strongly contributed to drawing attention to the issue of resilience in the healthcare domain. Nevertheless, the scientific literature appears fragmented, creating difficulties in developing incremental research in this relevant managerial field.To fill this gap, this systematic literature review aims to provide a clear state of the art of the literature dealing with resilience in healthcare. Specifically, from the analysis of the theoretical articles and reviews, the key dimensions of resilience are identified, and a novel classification framework is proposed. The classification framework is then used to systematize extant empirical contributions. Two main dimensions of resilience are identified: the approach to resilience (reactive vs. proactive) and the type of crisis to deal with (acute shocks vs. chronic stressors). Four main streams of research are thus identified: (i) proactive approaches to acute shocks; (ii) proactive approaches to chronic stressors; (iii) reactive approaches to acute shocks; and (iv) reactive approaches to chronic stressors. These are scrutinised considering three additional dimensions: the level of analysis, the resources to nurture resilience, and the country context. The classification framework and the associated mapping contribute to systematising the fragmented literature on resilience in healthcare, providing a clear picture of the state of the art in this field and drawing a research agenda that opens interesting paths for future research.

Potential Strengths and Weaknesses in Hospital Resilience in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Brazil: A Case Study

The analysis of hospital resilience is essential in understanding how health services prepared for and responded to sudden shocks and unexpected challenges in the COVID-19 health crisis. This study aimed to analyze the resilience of a referral hospital in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The main theoretical approach based on resilience is the system's capacity to maintain essential functions and to absorb, adapt, and transform in the face of unprecedented or unexpected changes. A single case study approach was used to identify the strengths and weaknesses of this response capacity. Data triangulation was employed. Data were collected from April (beginning of case discharges) to October 2020 (decrease in the moving average of cases in 2020). A content analysis was then conducted. Data were analyzed in relation to context, effects, strategies, and impacts in facing the disruptions caused by the pandemic. The results indicated the occurrence of four configurations mostly favorable to hospital resilience during the study period. Among the main strengths were: injection of financial resources; implementation of new hospital protocols; formation of a support network; equipping and continuing education of professionals; and proactive leadership. Weaknesses found in the analysis included: initial insufficiency of personal protective equipment and confirmatory tests; difficulties in restructuring work schedules; increasing illness among professionals; stress generated by constant changes and work overload; sense of discrimination for being a health professional; lack of knowledge about the clinical management of the disease; and the reduction of non-COVID assistance services.

A synthesis of concepts of resilience to inform operationalization of health systems resilience in recovery from disruptive public health events including COVID-19

This article is part of the Research Topic 'Health Systems Recovery in the Context of COVID-19 and Protracted Conflict' Health systems resilience has become a ubiquitous concept as countries respond to and recover from crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, war and conflict, natural disasters, and economic stressors inter alia. However, the operational scope and definition of health systems resilience to inform health systems recovery and the building back better agenda have not been elaborated in the literature and discourse to date. When widely used terms and their operational definitions appear nebulous or are not consistently used, it can perpetuate misalignment between stakeholders and investments. This can hinder progress in integrated approaches such as strengthening primary health care (PHC) and the essential public health functions (EPHFs) in health and allied sectors as well as hinder progress toward key global objectives such as recovering and sustaining progress toward universal health coverage (UHC), health security, healthier populations, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This paper represents a conceptual synthesis based on 45 documents drawn from peer-reviewed papers and gray literature sources and supplemented by unpublished data drawn from the extensive operational experience of the co-authors in the application of health systems resilience at country level. The results present a synthesis of global understanding of the concept of resilience in the context of health systems. We report on different aspects of health systems resilience and conclude by proposing a clear operational definition of health systems resilience that can be readily applied by different stakeholders to inform current global recovery and beyond.

The role of international support programmes in global health security capacity building: A scoping review

Large scale public health emergencies such as COVID-19 demonstrate the importance of Global Health Security (GHS) and highlight the necessity of resilient public health systems capable of preparing for, detecting, managing, and recovering from such emergencies. Many international programmes support low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to strengthen public health capabilities for compliance with the International Health Regulations (IHR). This narrative review seeks to identify key characteristics and factors necessary for effective and sustainable IHR core capacity development, establishing roles for international support and some principles of good practice. We reflect on the "what" and the "how" of international support approaches, highlighting the importance of equitable partnerships and bi-directional learning, and inviting global introspection and re-framing of what capable and developed public health systems look like.

Living through uncertainty: a qualitative study on leadership and resilience in primary healthcare during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Resilience is often referred to when assessing the ability of health systems to maintain their functions during unexpected events. Primary healthcare forms the basis for the health system and thus its resilient responses are vital for the outcomes of the whole system. Understanding how primary healthcare organisations are able to build resilience before, during, and after unexpected or sudden shocks, is key to public health preparedness. This study aims to identify how leaders responsible for local health systems interpreted changes in their operational environment during the first year of COVID-19, and to elucidate how these views reflect aspects of resilience in healthcare.

METHODS

The data consist of 14 semi-structured individual interviews with leaders of local health systems in Finland representing primary healthcare. The participants were recruited from four regions. An abductive thematic analysis was used to identify entities from the viewpoints of the purpose, resources, and processes of resilience in the healthcare organisation.

RESULTS

Results were summarised as six themes, which suggest that embracing uncertainty is viewed by the interviewees a basis for primary healthcare functioning. Leading towards adaptability was regarded a distinct leadership task enabling the organisation to modify its functions according to demands of the changing operational environment. Workforce, knowledge and sensemaking, as well as collaboration represented what the leaders viewed as the means for achieving adaptability. The ability to adapt functioned to comprehensively meet the population's service needs built on a holistic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed how the leaders who participated in this study adapted their work during changes brought on by the pandemic, and what they viewed as critical for maintaining organisational resilience. The leaders considered embracing uncertainty as a principal feature of their work rather than viewing uncertainty as aberrant and something to avoid. These notions, along with what the leaders considered as critical means for building resilience and adaptability should be addressed and elaborated in future research. Research on resilience and leadership should be conducted more in the complex context of primary healthcare, where cumulative stresses are encountered and processed continuously.

Health systems resilience: is it time to revisit resilience after COVID-19?

The concept of health system resilience has been challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic. Even well-established health systems, considered resilient, collapsed during the pandemic. To revisit the concept of resilience two years and a half after the initial impact of COVID-19, we conducted a qualitative study with 26 international experts in health systems to explore their views on concepts, stages, analytical frameworks, and implementation from a comparative perspective of high- and low-and-middle-income countries (HICs and LMICs). The interview guide was informed by a comprehensive literature review, and all interviewees had practice and academic expertise in some of the largest health systems in the world. Results show that the pandemic did modify experts' views on various aspects of health system resilience, which we summarize and propose as refinements to the current understanding of health systems resilience.

Resiliency of the Iranian healthcare facilities against the Covid-19 pandemic: challenges and solutions

BACKGROUND

Health care facilities are responsible for preventing and controlling diseases and must be resilient enough to deal with crises. The Iranian health care facilities have faced challenges in managing COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges faced by the Iranian health care facilities during the Covid-19 epidemic and to provide solutions.

METHODS

This qualitative study was conducted with a phenomenological approach and using semi-structured interviews with 59 healthcare policy makers, managers, and employees, and medical university faculty members. The participants were selected through purposive and snowball sampling. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Overall, 43 challenges to the resilience of health care facilities during the Covid-19 pandemic were identified and grouped into 8 themes (i.e., leadership and management, planning, organizational culture, organizational learning, employee management, customer management, resource management, and process management. The most important resilience challenges were: fragmented management system; poor leadership; incompatible health network structure; lack of a national holistic plan; poor case detection; insufficient resources; inefficient information system; negative attitude of managers and employee; organizational inertia; failure to build on lessons learned from crises; low workforce preparedness; lack of community-based management; and improper monitoring and evaluation. Managers should use community-based, evidence-based, and integrated management to build health system resilience against COVID-19, have sufficient knowledge and experience to organize operations, use appropriate and effective coordination models, develop a creative and participatory culture, reengineer processes, and provide necessary resources.

CONCLUSION

The Iranian health care facilities face challenges that prevent them from becoming resilient, responsive, and efficient in managing COVID-19. Policy makers and managers should increase the resilience of health care facilities to shocks and crises by using the suggested measures.

Identifying and prioritizing resilient health system units to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic

Since human health greatly depends on a healthy and risk-free social environment, it is very important to have a concept to focus on improving epidemiology capacity and potential along with economic perspectives as a very influential factor in the future of societies. Through responsible behavior during an epidemic crisis, the health system units can be utilized as a suitable platform for sustainable development. This study employs the Best-Worst Method (BWM) in order to develop a system for identifying and ranking health system units with understanding the nature of the epidemic to help the World Health Organization (WHO) in recognizing the capabilities of resilient health system units. The purpose of this study is to identify and prioritize the resilient health system units for dealing with Coronavirus. The statistical population includes 215 health system units in the world and the opinions of twenty medical experts are also utilized as an informative sample to localize the conceptual model of the study and answer the research questionnaires. The resilient health system units of the world are identified and prioritized based on the statistics of "Total Cases", "Total Recovered", "Total Deaths", "Active Cases", "Serious", "Total Tests" and "Day of Infection". The present descriptive cross-sectional study is conducted on Worldometer data of COVID-19 during the period of 17 July 2020 at 8:33 GMT. According to the results, the factors of "Total Cases", "Total Deaths", "Serious", "Active Cases", "Total Recovered", "Total Tests" and "Day of Infection" are among the most effective ones, respectively, in order to have a successful and optimal performance during a crisis. The attention of health system units to the identified important factors can improve the performance of epidemiology system. The WHO should pay more attention to low-resilience health system units in terms of promoting the health culture in crisis management of common viruses. Considering the importance of providing health services as well as their significant effect on the efficiency of the world health system, especially in critical situations, resilience analysis with the possibility of comparison and ranking can be an important step to continuously improve the performance of health system units.

Understanding resilience, self-reliance and increasing country voice: a clash of ideologies in global health

BACKGROUND

'Resilience', 'self-reliance' and 'increasing country voice' are widely used terms in global health. However, the terms are understood in diverse ways by various global health actors. We analyse how these terms are understood and why differences in understanding exist.

METHODS

Drawing on scholarship concerning ideology, framing and power, we employ a case study of a USAID-sponsored suite of awards called MOMENTUM. Applying a meta-ethnographic approach, we triangulate data from peer-reviewed and grey literature, as well as 27 key informant interviews with actors at the forefront of shaping these discourses and those associated with MOMENTUM, working in development agencies, implementing organisations, low-income and middle-income country governments, and academia.

RESULTS

The lack of common understanding of these three terms is in part a result of differences in two perspectives in global health-reformist and transformational-which are animated by fundamentally different ideologies. Reformists, reflecting neoliberal and liberal democratic ideologies, largely take a technocratic approach to understanding health problems and advance incremental solutions, working within existing global and local health systems to effect change. Transformationalists, reflecting threads of neo-Marxist ideology, see the problems as inherently political and seek to overhaul national and global systems and power relations. These ideologies shape differences in how actors define the problem, its solutions and attribute responsibility, resulting in nuanced differences among global health actors in their understanding of resilience, self-reliance and increasing country voice.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in how these terms are employed and framed are not just linguistic; the language that is used is reflective of underlying ideological differences among global health actors, with implications for the way programmes are designed and implemented, the knowledge that is produced and engagement with stakeholders. Laying these distinct ideologies bare may be crucial for managing actor differences and advancing more productive discussions and actions towards achieving global health equity.

Modifications in Primary Care Clinics to Continue Colorectal Cancer Screening Promotion During the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 caused significant declines in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Health systems and clinics, faced with a new rapidly spreading infectious disease, adapted to maintain patient safety and address the effects of the pandemic on healthcare delivery. This study aimed to understand how CDC-funded Colorectal Cancer Control Program recipients and their partner health systems and clinics may have modified evidence-based intervention (EBI) implementation to promote CRC screening during the COVID-19 pandemic; to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing modifications; and to extract lessons that can be applied to support CRC screening, chronic disease management, and clinic resilience in the face of future public health crises. Nine recipients were selected to reflect the diversity inherent among all CRCCP recipients. Recipient and clinic partner staff answered unique sets of pre-interview questions to inform tailoring of interview guides that were developed using constructs from the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The study team then interviewed recipient, health system, and clinic partner staff incorporating pre-interview responses to focus each conversation. We employed a rapid qualitative analysis approach then conducted virtual focus groups with recipient representatives to validate emergent themes. Three modifications that emerged from thematic analysis include: (1) offering mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits for CRC screening with mail or drop off return; (2) increasing the use of patient education and engagement strategies; and (3) increasing the use of or improving automated patient messaging systems. With improved tracking and automated reminder systems, mailed FIT kits paired with tailored patient education and clear instructions for completing the test could help primary care clinics catch up on the backlog of missed screenings during COVID-19. Future research can assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of offering mailed FIT kits on maintaining or improving CRC screening, especially among people who are medically underserved.

Any lessons to learn? Pathways and impasses towards health system resilience in post-pandemic times

The COVID-19 pandemic has been an ultimate challenge for health systems as a whole rather than just single sectors (e.g. hospital care). Particularly, interface management between health system sectors and cooperation among stakeholders turned out to be crucial for an adequate crisis response. Dealing with such interfaces, it is argued in the literature, demands from health care systems to become resilient. One way to analyse this is to focus on the ways in which bottlenecks in health systems are dealt with during the pandemic. This paper investigates six bottlenecks, including overburdened public health agencies, neglected nursing homes and insufficient testing capacities that have been encountered in the health systems of Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands during the pandemic. Based on empirical findings we identify and critically discuss preliminary lessons in terms of health system resilience, an increasingly popular theoretical concept that frames crises as an opportunity for health system renewal. We argue that in practice health system resilience is hindered by path dependencies of national health systems and, owed to the crisis, interim policies that lack ambition for broader reforms.

Highway traffic flow prediction model with multi-component spatial-temporal graph convolution networks

In order to effectively solve the problems of redundant medical material allocation, unbalanced material allocation, high distribution cost and lack of symmetry caused by unreasonable prediction in the case of sudden epidemic disasters, the prospect theory is introduced to establish a two-stage robust allocation model of medical materials, and the HQDRO based on the two-stage decision model is proposed. Aiming at minimizing the emergency response time and the total number of allocated materials, and taking the dynamic change of medical material demand in the epidemic sealed control area as the constraint condition, a two-stage robust planning model of medical materials based on scenario is established to realize the symmetrical allocation of medical materials under the sudden epidemic situation. Then, the perception model based on demand prediction, symmetry optimization, targeted distribution and psychological expectation of medical materials are constructed. Through the comparative analysis with the fitness of three commonly used algorithms in this field, the effectiveness of the robust configuration model and HQDRO proposed in this paper is verified.

Extending health systems resilience into communities: a qualitative study with community-based actors providing health services during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines

BACKGROUND

Amidst ongoing calls for increased health systems resilience, gaps remain in our understanding of how health systems can reach further into communities to ensure resilient service delivery. Indeed, public health emergencies caused by infectious hazards reveal both the value and vulnerability of the workforce delivering health services in communities. This study explores ways in which a non-governmental organization (NGO) in the Philippines protected their frontline workforce during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Guided by a qualitative descriptive approach, 34 in-depth interviews were conducted with community-based health actors employed by the NGO between June 2020 and February 2021. Data analysis was guided by an iterative deductive and inductive approach.

RESULTS

We identified four key activities that enabled the NGO and their staff to provide health and social services in communities in a safe and consistent manner as part of the organization's pandemic response. These include (1) ensuring adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) and hygiene supplies; (2) providing contextualized and role-specific infection prevention and control (IPC) training; (3) ensuring access to testing for all staff; and (4) providing support during quarantine or isolation.

CONCLUSION

Learning from the implementation of these activities offers a way forward toward health emergency preparedness and response that is crucially needed for NGOs to safely leverage their workforce during pandemics. Further, we describe how community-based health actors employed by NGOs can contribute to broader health systems resilience in the context of health emergency preparedness and response.

A literature review exploring how health systems respond to acute shocks in fragile and conflict-affected countries

Understanding how health systems respond to shocks has become a pressing need to strengthen response efforts. With already fragmented and disrupted health services, fragile and conflict affected [FCA] countries are more vulnerable to shocks. Previous studies have focused more on conceptualizing health system resilience rather than how health systems [especially in FCA countries] respond to or are resilient to acute shocks. To understand how health systems in FCA countries respond to the shocks and what influence their responses, we conducted a review of the literature published between January 2011 and September 2021 on health system responses to acute shocks in FCA countries. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, Jester and Google Scholar – 60 empirical studies in FCA countries on response to sudden, extreme, and unanticipated shocks were included in the review. We found that health systems in FCA countries responded to acute shock using absorptive, adaptive, or transformative capacities. These capacities were mediated by four dimensions of context; knowledge, uncertainties, interdependence, and legitimacy. In addition, we identified the cross-cutting role of community involvement [and its self-evolving nature], frontline workers, and leadership capacity. To our knowledge, this is among the first reviews that focus on FCA country health systems responses to acute shock. By highlighting enabling and constraining factors to each type of capacity, this study provides important lessons and practical strategies from FCA countries on how to absorb, adapt and transform in response to acute shocks – thus promoting health system resilience globally.

Metrics and indicators used to assess health system resilience in response to shocks to health systems in high income countries-A systematic review

Health system resilience has never been more important than with the COVID-19 pandemic. There is need to identify feasible measures of resilience, potential strategies to build resilience and weaknesses of health systems experiencing shocks. The purpose of this systematic review is to examine how the resilience of health systems has been measured across various health system shocks. Following PRISMA guidelines, with double screening at each stage, the review identified 3175 studies of which 68 studies were finally included for analysis. Almost half (46%) were focused on COVID-19, followed by the economic crises, disasters and previous pandemics. Over 80% of studies included quantitative metrics. The most common WHO health system functions studied were resources and service delivery. In relation to the shock cycle, most studies reported metrics related to the management stage (79%) with the fewest addressing recovery and learning (22%). Common metrics related to staff headcount, staff wellbeing, bed number and type, impact on utilisation and quality, public and private health spending, access and coverage, and information systems. Limited progress has been made with developing standardised qualitative metrics particularly around governance. Quantitative metrics need to be analysed in relation to change and the impact of the shock. The review notes problems with measuring preparedness and the fact that few studies have really assessed the legacy or enduring impact of shocks.

Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes: a systematic scoping review and analysis using the TIDieR checklist for reporting interventions

PURPOSE

Aphasia is an acquired language disorder that typically occurs as a result of a stroke. People with aphasia experience communication difficulties and risk secondary impacts, for example, affecting social and work life and mental health. Intensive Comprehensive Aphasia Programmes (ICAPs) aims to address the multiple consequences of aphasia using intensive intervention and a wide range of therapy approaches. Although basic parameters of ICAP intervention have been defined, a fuller characterisation is needed. This systematic scoping review aimed to determine what constitutes an ICAP.

METHODS

Peer-reviewed and Grey databases were searched for articles on ICAPs using Joanna Brigg's Institute methodology. Data was extracted following the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist for reporting interventions and synthesised using a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

17 ICAPs were reported in 20 peer-reviewed literature sources (9 ICAPs supplemented by Grey literature sources). There were high degrees of variation in dose, professionals involved, and no qualitative data from participants. Of note, ICAP intervention was highly tailored to individual participants on the same ICAP, and intervention content varied between ICAPs. ICAPs appear to be rationalised as intensive impairment-based programmes with other components added for comprehensiveness. Stronger rationale and a logic model are required to justify the core components of ICAPs. The input of stakeholders into designing future ICAP interventions is recommended.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe ICAP model is in its infancy when it comes to mainstream clinical application as only the intensity component of the ICAP has clear theoretical underpinning as reported in the peer-reviewed literature.There have been clinical uptakes of the ICAP model which is likely to continue and is valid in the context of an under-researched area of aphasia therapy and on a background of a less than perfect relationship between evidence base and practice.Aspects of the ICAP model are valid for clinicians to implement, for example, intensive evidence-based aphasia therapy in combination with therapy which addresses some of the broader implications of aphasia, for example, social isolation.Clinicians can use the ICAP model to review their existing service provision and explore whether their service provides aphasia therapy that addresses the multiple aspects of aphasia (i.e., ensuring the focus is not only on impairment-based therapy).

The value of vaccines

Optimizing vaccine spending depends on recognizing the full value of vaccination (VoV). Existing taxonomies of such value are not comprehensive because they are not guided by general theories. I rely on two such theories: subjective-value theory claims that what has value is determined by what people actually or ideally want in life. A welfarist theory of government states that a fundamental objective of government is to promote social value (or social welfare). These jointly imply that any aspect of life that individuals actually or ideally value and that could be negatively affected by vaccine-preventable diseases (and therefore positively affected by preventive vaccines) is an element of VoV. I build a more comprehensive-value taxonomy than currently exists based on this implication.