Ismail Sharif A, Bell Sadie, Chalabi Zaid, Fouad Fouad M, Mechler Reinhard, Tomoaia-Cotisel Andrada, Blanchet Karl, Borghi Josephine
Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Wellcome Open Res. 2022 May 13;7:151. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17834.1. eCollection 2022.
Health systems worldwide face major challenges in anticipating, planning for and responding to shocks from infectious disease epidemics, armed conflict, climatic and other crises. Although the literature on health system resilience has grown substantially in recent years, major uncertainties remain concerning approaches to resilience conceptualisation and measurement. This narrative review revisits literatures from a range of fields outside health to identify lessons relevant to health systems. Four key insights emerge. Firstly, shocks can only be understood by clarifying how, where and over what timescale they interact with a system of interest, and the dynamic effects they produce within it. Shock effects are contingent on historical path-dependencies, and on the presence of factors or system pathways (e.g. financing models, health workforce capabilities or supply chain designs) that may amplify or dampen impact in unexpected ways. Secondly, shocks often produce cascading effects across multiple scales, whereas the focus of much of the health resilience literature has been on macro-level, national systems. In reality, health systems bring together interconnected sub-systems across sectors and geographies, with different components, behaviours and sometimes even objectives - all influencing how a system responds to a shock. Thirdly, transformability is an integral feature of resilient social systems: cross-scale interactions help explain how systems can show both resilience and transformational capability at the same time. We illustrate these first three findings by extending the socioecological concept of adaptive cycles in social systems to health, using the example of maternal and child health service delivery. Finally, we argue that dynamic modelling approaches, under-utilised in research on health system resilience to date, have significant promise for identification of shock-moderating or shock-amplifying pathways, for understanding effects at multiple levels and ultimately for building resilience.
全球卫生系统在预测、规划和应对传染病流行、武装冲突、气候及其他危机带来的冲击方面面临重大挑战。尽管近年来关于卫生系统复原力的文献大量增加,但在复原力概念化和衡量方法方面仍存在重大不确定性。本叙述性综述回顾了卫生领域以外一系列领域的文献,以确定与卫生系统相关的经验教训。得出了四个关键见解。首先,只有通过阐明冲击如何、在何处以及在何种时间尺度上与相关系统相互作用,以及它们在系统内产生的动态影响,才能理解冲击。冲击效应取决于历史路径依赖,以及可能以意想不到的方式放大或减弱影响的因素或系统路径(如融资模式、卫生人力能力或供应链设计)的存在。其次,冲击往往会在多个尺度上产生级联效应,而许多卫生复原力文献的重点一直是宏观层面的国家系统。实际上,卫生系统将不同部门和地域相互关联的子系统整合在一起,这些子系统具有不同的组成部分、行为,有时甚至目标——所有这些都会影响系统对冲击的反应。第三,可转化性是有复原力的社会系统的一个不可或缺的特征:跨尺度相互作用有助于解释系统如何能够同时展现复原力和变革能力。我们以母婴保健服务提供为例,将社会系统中适应性循环的社会生态概念扩展到卫生领域,来说明前三个发现。最后,我们认为动态建模方法在迄今为止的卫生系统复原力研究中未得到充分利用,对于识别冲击缓和或放大路径、理解多层次影响以及最终构建复原力具有重大潜力。