Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Global Public Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:6659. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6659. Epub 2022 Dec 6.
Health challenges like coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are becoming increasingly complex, transnational, and unpredictable. Studying health system responses to the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to enhance our understanding of health system resilience and establish a clearer link between theoretical concepts and practical ideas on how to build resilience.
This narrative literature review aims to address four questions using a health system resilience framework: () What do we understand about the dimensions of resilience? () What aspects of the resilience dimensions remain uncertain? () What aspects of the resilience dimensions are missing from the COVID-19 discussions? and () What has COVID-19 taught us about resilience that is missing from the framework? A scientific literature database search was conducted in December 2020 and in April 2022 to identify publications that discussed health system resilience in relation to COVID-19, excluding articles on psychological and other types of resilience. A total of 63 publications were included.
There is good understanding around information sharing, flexibility and good leadership, learning, maintaining essential services, and the need for legitimate, interdependent systems. Decision-making, localized trust, influences on interdependence, and transformation remain uncertain. Vertical interdependence, monitoring risks beyond the health system, and consequences of changes on the system were not discussed. Teamwork, actor legitimacy, values, inclusivity, trans-sectoral resilience, and the role of the private sector are identified as lessons from COVID-19 that should be further explored for health system resilience.
Knowledge of health system resilience has continued to cohere following the pandemic. The eventual consequences of system changes and the resilience of subsystems are underexplored. Through governance, the concept of health system resilience can be linked to wider issues raised by the pandemic, like inclusivity. Our findings show the utility of resilience theory for strengthening health systems for crises and the benefit of continuing to refine existing resilience theory.
像 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)这样的健康挑战变得越来越复杂、跨国界和不可预测。研究卫生系统对 COVID-19 大流行的应对措施是增强我们对卫生系统弹性的理解并在如何建立弹性的理论概念和实际想法之间建立更清晰联系的机会。
本叙述性文献综述旨在使用卫生系统弹性框架回答四个问题:(1)我们对弹性的各个维度有哪些了解?(2)弹性维度的哪些方面尚不确定?(3)COVID-19 讨论中缺少弹性维度的哪些方面?(4)COVID-19 教会了我们关于弹性的哪些缺失框架?2020 年 12 月和 2022 年 4 月进行了科学文献数据库搜索,以确定讨论与 COVID-19 相关的卫生系统弹性的出版物,不包括关于心理和其他类型弹性的文章。共纳入 63 篇出版物。
在信息共享、灵活性和良好领导力、学习、维持基本服务以及需要合法、相互依存的系统方面有很好的理解。决策、本地化信任、对相互依存的影响以及系统变化的后果仍不确定。垂直相互依存、监测卫生系统以外的风险以及系统变化对系统的影响没有讨论。团队合作、行为者合法性、价值观、包容性、跨部门弹性以及私营部门的作用被确定为 COVID-19 的经验教训,应进一步探讨以增强卫生系统的弹性。
大流行后,卫生系统弹性的知识继续凝聚。系统变化的最终后果和子系统的弹性仍未得到充分探讨。通过治理,可以将卫生系统弹性的概念与大流行提出的更广泛的问题(如包容性)联系起来。我们的研究结果表明,弹性理论对于加强卫生系统应对危机非常有用,并且有利于继续完善现有弹性理论。