4.2 Review

A Concept Analysis on Disaster Resilience in Rescue Workers: The Psychological Perspective

Journal

DISASTER MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS
Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages 1682-1691

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/dmp.2021.157

Keywords

concept analysis; disaster resilience; rescue workers

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article examines the concept of disaster resilience in rescue workers. Through a systematic search and literature analysis, the attributes, antecedents, and consequences of disaster resilience are identified. The findings can contribute to the development of standardized screening or assessment tools and tailored training programs for strengthening disaster resilience.
Objective: The term disaster resilience has not been well defined. The purpose of this article is to scrutinize the concept of disaster resilience in rescue workers. Methods: A systematic search was conducted of the PsychInfo, PubMed, ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus databases using the key terms. The framework from Walker and Avant was used to analyze the concept of disaster resilience. Results: A total of 26 papers was included in this analysis. The attributes of disaster resilience have been identified from the literature as including personality, perceived control, self-efficacy, coping strategies, and social support. The antecedents of disaster resilience are disastrous events and preparedness for disaster. The consequences of disaster resilience are psychological well-being, posttraumatic growth, and enhanced work engagement. Conclusion: This concept analysis presents a definition of the concept of disaster resilience that could contribute to the development of a standardized screening or assessment tool and tailored training programs to strengthen disaster resilience among those who are willing to be deployed to engage in disaster rescue work and those who have been involved in such work.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available