ArticleBMC public health2024
Lessons learned from health system rehabilitation preparedness and response for disasters in LMICs: a scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDisasters such as earthquakes, conflict, or landslides result in traumatic injuries creating surges in rehabilitation and assistive technology needs, exacerbating pre-existing unmet needs. Disasters frequently occur in countries where existing rehabilitation services are underdeveloped, hindering response to rehabilitation demand surge events.
aimsThe primary aim of this scoping review is therefore to synthesize the evidence on rehabilitation and assistive technology preparedness and response of health systems in LMICs to the demand associated with disasters and conflict situations. A secondary aim was to summarize related recommendations identified in the gathered literature. METHODOLOGY: A scoping review was conducted using the Arksey and O'Malley framework to guide the methodological development. The results are reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Four bibliographic databases were used: CINHAL, Cochrane, Pubmed, Scopus and. Key international organisations were also contacted. The search period was from 2010-2022. Eligible publications were categorized for analysis under the six World Health Organization health systems buildings blocks.
resultsThe findings of this scoping review suggest that rehabilitation is poorly integrated into health systems disaster preparedness and response in LMICs. Of the 27 studies included in the scoping review, 14 focused on service delivery, 6 on health workforce, 4 on health information systems and 3 on the leadership and governance building block. No study focused on financing nor assistive technology. This review found the most frequently referenced recommendations for actions that should be taken to develop rehabilitation services in disasters to be: the provision early and multi-professional rehabilitation, including the provision of assistive technology and psychological support, integrated community services; disaster response specific training for rehabilitation professionals; advocacy efforts to create awareness of the importance of rehabilitation in disasters; and the integration of rehabilitation into disaster preparedness and response plans.
conclusionFindings of this scoping review suggest that rehabilitation is poorly integrated into health systems disaster preparedness and response in LMIC's, largely due to low awareness of rehabilitation, undeveloped rehabilitation health systems and a lack of rehabilitation professionals, and disaster specific training for them. The paucity of available evidence hinders advocacy efforts for rehabilitation in disaster settings and limits the sharing of experiences and lessons learnt to improve rehabilitation preparedness and response. Advocacy efforts need to be expanded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.