For hospitals, learning from disaster response efforts and adapting organizational practices can improve resilience in dealing with future disruptions. However, amidst global disruptions by climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and other disasters, hospitals’ ability to cope continues to be highly variable. Hence, there are increasing calls to improve hospitals’ capabilities to grow and adapt towards enhanced resilience.

This study aims two-fold: (1) to characterize the current state of knowledge about how hospitals are gaining knowledge from their responses to disasters, and (2) to explore how this knowledge can be applied to inform organizational practices for hospital resilience.

This study used Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for data collection and framework for data analysis, Covidence software, and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords relevant to “hospitals,” “learn,” “disaster response,” and “resilience.” The quality appraisal used an adapted version of the Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAT).

After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and quality appraisal, out of the 420 articles retrieved, 22 articles remained for thematic and content analysis. The thematic analysis included the hospital’s functional (operational) and physical (structural and non-structural) sections. The content analysis followed nine learning areas (Governance and Leadership, Planning and Risk Assessment, Surveillance and Monitoring, Communication and Network Engagement, Staff Practices and Safety, Equipment and Resources, Facilities and Infrastructure, Novelty and Innovation, and Learning and Evaluation).

On applying the Deming cycle, only four studies described a completed learning cycle wherein hospitals adapted their organizational structures using the prior experience and evaluation gained in responding to disaster(s).

There is a gap between hospitals’ organizational learning and institutionalized practice. The conceptualized Hybrid Resilience Learning Framework (HRLF) aims to guide the hospitals’ decision makers in evaluating organizational resilience and knowledge.

In the face of disasters, both the stressful factors and the coping strategies that affect the health care workers (HCWs) should be substantially considered.

This study compared the per capita annual global incidence rate of disasters caused by natural hazards with the annual world real gross domestic product, GDP (per global capita), as reported during 1961 through 2020.

Sixty (60) values for the world real GDP per global capita (in constant 2015 $USD) were compared to corresponding annual values for global incidence rates for five natural disaster subgroups and then for a total of twelve individual disaster types that comprise the subgroups; each expressed as an annual global incidence rate (in terms of annual incidence per 100,000 persons). Calculations of multiple linear regression, ANOVA, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient were performed for comparing population-adjusted values for GDP to corresponding values.

Four out of five hydrological and meteorological disasters were found to have a positive correlation with GDP. Results of the analysis revealed a relatively high degree of correlation between world GDP and the annual incidence of flood and storm disasters (P = 6.21 × 10−10 and P = 4.23 × 10−4, respectively). The annual incidence of heat waves and cold weather disasters also appeared to correlate with GDP (P = .002 and P = .019, respectively). In comparison, wet landslides indicated no such correlation (P = .862). No significant associations were found among the seven other individual biological, climatological, and geophysical disasters and GDP.

The global incidence of four extreme weather (hydrometeorological) disasters appear to be positively associated with world real GDP during 1961-2020. These findings contradict previous postulates that the risk of disaster incidence is inversely associated with the capacity of the population.

This manuscript summarizes the global incidence, exposures, mortality, and morbidity associated with extreme weather event (EWE) disasters over the past 50 years (1969-2018).

A historical database (1969-2018) was created from the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) to include all disasters caused by seven EWE hazards (ie, cyclones, droughts, floods, heatwaves, landslides, cold weather, and storms). The annual incidence of EWE hazards and rates of exposure, morbidity, and mortality were calculated. Regression analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA) calculations were performed to evaluate the association between the exposure rate and the hazard incidence rate, as well as the association between morbidity and mortality incidence rates and rates of human exposure and annual EWE incidence.

From 1969-2018, 10,009 EWE disasters caused 2,037,415 deaths and 3,998,466 cases of disease. A reported 7,350,276,440 persons required immediate assistance. Floods and storms were the most common. Most (89%) of EWE-related disaster mortality was caused by storms, droughts, and floods. Nearly all (96%) of EWE-related disaster morbidity was caused by cold weather, floods, and storms. Regression analysis revealed strong evidence (R2 = 0.88) that the annual incidence of EWE disasters is increasing world-wide, and ANOVA calculations identified an association between human exposure rates and hazard incidence (P value = .01). No significant trends were noted for rates of exposure, morbidity, or mortality.

The annual incidence of EWEs appears to be increasing. The incidence of EWEs also appears to be associated with rates of human exposure. However, there is insufficient evidence of an associated increase in health risk or human exposures to EWEs over time.