Health system resilience – a conceptual and empirical review of health system literature

Author:

Wahedi K1,Biddle L1,Bozorgmehr K12

Affiliation:

1. Working Group on Social Determinants, Equity and Migration, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

2. Working Group on Population Medicine and Health Services Research, University Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background The concept of health system resilience has gained popularity in the global health discourse, featuring in UN policies, academic articles and conferences. The term is commonly used to refer to the ability of health systems to respond to challenges. However, there has been no comprehensive overview of how the concept is understood and assessed in health systems research (HSR). Methods We conducted a conceptual and empirical review in 3 databases using systematic methods. Quantitative and narrative synthesis was used to trace the introduction of the concept to HSR, identify relevant definitions and examine its use in research. Results From 4063 references, we identified 96 articles concerned with health system resilience from 2007 - 2017, with a recent increase in literature (45% of studies published since 2016). Many articles take a general perspective; others focus on specific HSR building blocks (e.g. 28% on service delivery) or a particular type of crisis, such as climate change (12.5%) or natural disasters (10.4%). While the concept was developed from the ecological sciences, its meaning has been adapted in HSR, with a shift towards people-centred and process-oriented definitions. We identify three frameworks operationalising resilience: the “attributes” framework by Kruk et al. (2017), the “everyday resilience” framework by Barasa et al. (2017) and the “complex adaptive systems” framework by Blanchet et al. (2017). However, we find a mismatch between these frameworks and how the concept is assessed in 13 quantitative and 8 qualitative empirical studies. Conclusions The HSR literature has converged around a definition of resilience focusing on the system’s ability to mitigate ongoing challenges. Differences in emphasis remain, resulting in a variety of operational frameworks. The frameworks require further adaptation and testing in empirical studies to demonstrate the usefulness of “resilience” as an analytical category in HSR. Key messages There is a mismatch between conceptualisation and operationalisation of resilience in the HSR literature. Existing operational frameworks of resilience require further adaptation and testing in empirical studies to demonstrate the usefulness of “resilience” as an analytical category in HSR.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3