Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Based on interviews with individuals who struggle with severe psychic distress, contributors to this edited collection critique conventional pharmaceutical and medicalized treatment and argue for the need to create facilitative spaces in which psychosocial and familial supports are offered as adjuncts to therapy\"-- Provided by publisher.

The goal of this mixed-methods study was to identify and compare the key capacity considerations regarding public health system resilience before and after the 2023 Türkiye-Syria earthquakes. Public health system resilience was assessed through online and face-to-face workshops using the United Nations Public Health System Resilience Scorecard. The pre-earthquake evaluation was conducted in Istanbul and Trabzon in 2021; the post-earthquake evaluation took place in Hatay and Kahramanmaraş in 2023, with a total of 41 participants each. The online workshops lasted approximately four days, while the face-to-face workshops lasted one day. The study found a significant decrease in the scores for most scorecard resilience indicators in the post-earthquake assessment. Qualitative analysis showed that this decline was largely due to infrastructure collapse. Additionally, defining the roles of health disciplines in disaster management and having data transmission procedures between public health system stakeholders in disasters were among the main capacity considerations in both the pre-and post-earthquake assessments. The post-earthquake evaluation revealed several capacity gaps that had not been addressed in pre-earthquake assessments in areas such as disaster preparedness of vulnerable populations and logistics. The findings highlight the critical importance of strengthening building stock and infrastructure to establish a disaster-resilient public health system.

Abstract The concept of health system resilience has gained popularity in the global health discourse, featuring in UN policies, academic articles and conferences. While substantial effort has gone into the conceptualization of health system resilience, there has been no review of how the concept has been operationalized in empirical studies. We conducted an empirical review in three databases using systematic methods. Findings were synthesized using descriptive quantitative analysis and by mapping aims, findings, underlying concepts and measurement approaches according to the resilience definition by Blanchet et al. We identified 71 empirical studies on health system resilience from 2008 to 2019, with an increase in literature in recent years (62% of studies published since 2017). Most studies addressed a specific crisis or challenge (82%), most notably infectious disease outbreaks (20%), natural disasters (15%) and climate change (11%). A large proportion of studies focused on service delivery (48%), while other health system building blocks were side-lined. The studies differed in terms of their disciplinary tradition and conceptual background, which was reflected in the variety of concepts and measurement approaches used. Despite extensive theoretical work on the domains which constitute health system resilience, we found that most of the empirical literature only addressed particular aspects related to absorptive and adaptive capacities, with legitimacy of institutions and transformative resilience seldom addressed. Qualitative and mixed methods research captured a broader range of resilience domains than quantitative research. The review shows that the way in which resilience is currently applied in the empirical literature does not match its theoretical foundations. In order to do justice to the complexities of the resilience concept, knowledge from both quantitative and qualitative research traditions should be integrated in a comprehensive assessment framework. Only then will the theoretical ‘resilience idea’ be able to prove its usefulness for the research community.

Recent health system shocks such as the Ebola outbreak of 2014-2016 and the global financial crisis of 2008 have generated global health interest in the concept of resilience. The concept is however not new, and has been applied to other sectors for a longer period of time. We conducted a review of empirical literature from both the health and other sectors to synthesize evidence on organizational resilience. We systematically searched for literature in PubMed, Econlit, EBSCOHOST databases, google, and Google Scholar and manually searched the reference lists of selected papers. We identified 34 papers that met our inclusion criteria. We analysed data from the selected papers by thematic review. Resilience was generally taken to mean a system's ability to continue to meet its objectives in the face of challenges. The concepts of resilience that were used in the selected papers emphasized not just a system's capacity to withstand shocks, but also to adapt and transform. The resilience of organizations was influenced by the following factors: Material resources, preparedness and planning, information management, collateral pathways and redundancy, governance processes, leadership practices, organizational culture, human capital, social networks and collaboration. A common theme across the selected papers is the recognition of resilience as an emergent property of complex adaptive systems. Resilience is both a function of planning for and preparing for future crisis (planned resilience), and adapting to chronic stresses and acute shocks (adaptive resilience). Beyond resilience to acute shocks, the resilience of health systems to routine and chronic stress (everyday resilience) is also key. Health system software is as, if not more important, as its hardware in nurturing health system resilience.

Background The health system plays a critical role in safeguarding the well-being of communities in the face of health risks associated with climate change. This review maps evidence on health systems' adaptation to climate risk and barriers to effective adaptation. Methods This review followed the recommendations by Arksey and O’Malley for conducting scoping review. Search for records was conducted in PubMed, Central, Web of Science, JSTOR, Google, and Google Scholar. Only peer-reviewed papers published in English language were included in this review. All the 63 included studies were critically appraise d. Results We found that efforts are being made to create resilient health systems by incorporating climate change into health policies. Investments are being made in innovative technologies, climate-resilient health infrastructure, enhancing healthcare delivery, developing the capacity of climate specialists and agencies to provide high-quality evidence for resilient health systems. We also found that several obstacles prevent health system adaptation to climate risk, including poor policy implementation and evaluation. The obstacles are further exacerbated by financial constraints, including poverty, a lack of political commitment, inadequate data, and deficient healthcare systems, especially in developing countries. There is also a lack of integration of climate change into mental health actions and the health and safety of healthcare workers. Conclusion Efforts to develop resilient health systems against climate risks are underway, but persistent obstacles, including inadequate policy implementation, resource limitations, and a lack of integration of climate change into critical health domains, hinder comprehensive adaptation measures, particularly in developing nations.

Background The 2014–2016 Ebola outbreak was a wake-up call regarding the critical importance of resilient health systems. Fragile health systems can become overwhelmed during public health crises, further exacerbating the human, economic, and political toll. Important work has been done to describe the general attributes of a health system resilient to these crises, and the next step will be to identify the specific capacities that health systems need to develop and maintain to achieve resiliency. Methods We conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify recurring themes and capacities needed for health system resiliency to infectious disease outbreaks and natural hazards and any existing implementation frameworks that highlight these capacities. We also sought to identify the overlap of the identified themes and capacities with those highlighted in the World Health Organization’s Joint External Evaluation. Sources of evidence included PubMed, Web of Science, OAIster, and the websites of relevant major public health organizations. Results We identified 16 themes of health system resilience, including: the need to develop plans for altered standards of care during emergencies, the need to develop plans for post-event recovery, and a commitment to quality improvement. Most of the literature described the general attributes of a resilient health system; no implementation frameworks were identified that could translate these elements into specific capacities that health system actors can employ to improve resilience to outbreaks and natural hazards in a variety of settings. Conclusions An implementation-oriented health system resilience framework could help translate the important components of a health system identified in this review into specific capacities that actors in the health system could work to develop to improve resilience to public health crises. However, there remains a need to further refine the concept of resilience so that health systems can simultaneously achieve sustainable transformations in healthcare practice and health service delivery as well as improve their preparedness for emergencies.

Background Resilient and responsive healthcare systems is on the agenda as ever before. COVID-19, specialization of services, resource demands, and technology development are all examples of aspects leading to adaptations among stakeholders at different system levels whilst also attempting to maintain high service quality and safety. This commentary sets the scene for a journal collection on Resilient and responsive health systems in a changing world . The commentary aims to outline main challenges and opportunities in resilient healthcare theory and practice globally, as a backdrop for contributions to the collection. Main text Some of the main challenges in this field relate to a myriad of definitions and approaches to resilience in healthcare, and a lack of studies having multilevel perspectives. Also, the role of patients, families, and the public in resilient and responsive healthcare systems is under researched. By flipping the coin, this illustrates opportunities for research and practice and raise key issues that future resilience research should pay attention to. The potential of combining theoretical lenses from different resilience traditions, involvement of multiple stakeholders in co-creating research and practice improvement, and modelling and visualizing resilient performance are all opportunities to learn more about how healthcare succeeds under stress and normal operations. Conclusion A wide understanding of resilience and responsiveness is needed to support planning and preparation for future disasters and for handling the routine small-scale adaptation. This collection welcomes systematic reviews, quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research on the topic of resilience and responsiveness in all areas of the health system.

Recent health system shocks such as the Ebola disease outbreak have focused global health attention on the notion of resilient health systems. In this commentary, we reflect on the current framing of the concept of resilience in health systems discourse and propose a reframing. Specifically, we propose that: (1) in addition to sudden shocks, health systems face the ongoing strain of multiple factors. Health systems need the capacity to continue to deliver services of good quality and respond effectively to wider health challenges. We call this capacity everyday resilience; (2) health system resilience entails more than bouncing back from shock. In complex adaptive systems (CAS), resilience emerges from a combination of absorptive, adaptive and transformative strategies; (3) nurturing the resilience of health systems requires understanding health systems as comprising not only hardware elements (such as finances and infrastructure), but also software elements (such as leadership capacity, power relations, values and appropriate organizational culture). We also reflect on current criticisms of the concept of resilient health systems, such as that it assumes that systems are apolitical, ignoring actor agency, promoting inaction, and requiring that we accept and embrace vulnerability, rather than strive for stronger and more responsive systems. We observe that these criticisms are warranted to the extent that they refer to notions of resilience that are mismatched with the reality of health systems as CAS. We argue that the observed weaknesses of resilience thinking can be addressed by reframing and applying a resilience lens that is better suited to the attributes of health systems as CAS.

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.

Background As health systems struggle to tackle the spread of Covid-19, resilience becomes an especially relevant attribute and research topic. More than strength or preparedness, to perform resiliently to emerging shocks, health systems must develop specific abilities that aim to increase their potential to adapt to extraordinary situations while maintaining their regular functioning. Brazil has been one of the most affected countries during the pandemic. In January 2021, the Amazonas state's health system collapsed, especially in the city of Manaus, where acute Covid-19 patients died due to scarcity of medical supplies for respiratory therapy. Methods This paper explores the case of the health system's collapse in Manaus to uncover the elements that prevented the system from performing resiliently to the pandemic, by carrying out a grounded-based systems analysis of the performance of health authorities in Brazil using the Functional Resonance Analysis Method. The major source of information for this study was the reports from the congressional investigation carried out to unveil the Brazilian response to the pandemic. Results Poor cohesion between the different levels of government disrupted essential functions for managing the pandemic. Moreover, the political agenda interfered in the abilities of the system to monitor, respond, anticipate, and learn, essential aspects of resilient performance. Conclusions Through a systems analysis approach, this study describes the implicit strategy of \"living with Covid-19\", and an in-depth view of the measures that hampered the resilience of the Brazilian health system to the spread of Covid-19.