Healthcare Organizational Resilience: A Systematic Review and Integrative Framework of Factors, Capabilities, Outcomes, and Context

Abstract Background Healthcare organizational resilience remains inconsistently defined and measured, with organizational factors, capabilities, and outcomes frequently conflated. Objective To examine definitions and operationalizations, synthesize organizational factors, resilience capabilities, outcomes, and context, and develop an evidence-informed integrative framework. Methods We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to 11 May 2026 for empirical studies examining healthcare organizations as resilient entities. We synthesized qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods evidence using a convergent integrated approach informed by Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Inductively coded findings were classified by analytical role. Results Forty-seven reports representing 45 studies (25 qualitative, 15 quantitative, five mixed-methods) across multiple countries were included; 31 examined COVID-19 or pandemic conditions, and most concerned hospitals. Operationalizations included direct measures, frameworks, qualitative inference, service proxies, and expert ratings. Six factor domains concerned leadership and governance; workforce and culture; information, communication, and digital technologies; preparedness and coordination; material, financial, and infrastructural resources; and external relationships and policy support. Five capabilities comprised anticipation and preparation, absorption, adaptation and reconfiguration, restoration and recovery, and learning and transformation. Four outcome groups were service continuity, safety and quality, recovery, and organizational viability. Immediate continuity sometimes depended on workforce overextension, deferred care, temporary support, or resource depletion. The framework distinguishes factors, capabilities, outcomes, and contextual conditions. Conclusions Resilience assessment should extend beyond preparedness plans and immediate continuity to safety, workforce well-being, recovery, and longer-term viability. The hypothesis-generating framework requires prospective testing across healthcare settings and disruptions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Research Square
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11543209/v1
Primary Topic
Healthcare Quality and Management
Type
preprint

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Healthcare Organizational Resilience: A Systematic Review and Integrative Framework of Factors, Capabilities, Outcomes, and Context

Atena Pasha, Shan Qiao, Abdul‐Hanan Saani Inusah, Xiaoming Li
1 links
Research Square
Healthcare Quality and Management
preprint

Healthcare Organizational Resilience: A Systematic Review and Integrative Framework of Factors, Capabilities, Outcomes, and Context

Atena Pasha, Shan Qiao, Abdul‐Hanan Saani Inusah, Xiaoming Li
preprint en

Abstract

Abstract Background Healthcare organizational resilience remains inconsistently defined and measured, with organizational factors, capabilities, and outcomes frequently conflated. Objective To examine definitions and operationalizations, synthesize organizational factors, resilience capabilities, outcomes, and context, and develop an evidence-informed integrative framework. Methods We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to 11 May 2026 for empirical studies examining healthcare organizations as resilient entities. We synthesized qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods evidence using a convergent integrated approach informed by Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. Inductively coded findings were classified by analytical role. Results Forty-seven reports representing 45 studies (25 qualitative, 15 quantitative, five mixed-methods) across multiple countries were included; 31 examined COVID-19 or pandemic conditions, and most concerned hospitals. Operationalizations included direct measures, frameworks, qualitative inference, service proxies, and expert ratings. Six factor domains concerned leadership and governance; workforce and culture; information, communication, and digital technologies; preparedness and coordination; material, financial, and infrastructural resources; and external relationships and policy support. Five capabilities comprised anticipation and preparation, absorption, adaptation and reconfiguration, restoration and recovery, and learning and transformation. Four outcome groups were service continuity, safety and quality, recovery, and organizational viability. Immediate continuity sometimes depended on workforce overextension, deferred care, temporary support, or resource depletion. The framework distinguishes factors, capabilities, outcomes, and contextual conditions. Conclusions Resilience assessment should extend beyond preparedness plans and immediate continuity to safety, workforce well-being, recovery, and longer-term viability. The hypothesis-generating framework requires prospective testing across healthcare settings and disruptions.

Research Square
University of South Carolina (US)
National Institutes of Health
Good health and well-being
Healthcare Quality and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon