Disaster management in low- and middle-income countries: scoping review of the evidence base

Abstract

IntroductionGlobally, there has been an increase in the prevalence and scale of disasters with low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) tending to be more affected. Consequently, disaster risk reduction has been advocated as a global priority. However, the evidence base for disaster management in these settings is unclear.MethodsThis study is a scoping review of the evidence base for disaster management in LMIC. Potentially relevant articles between 1990 and 2011 were searched for, assessed for relevance and subsequently categorised using a thematic coding framework based on the US Integrated Emergency Management System model.ResultsOut of 1545 articles identified, only 178 were from LMIC settings. Most were of less robust design such as event reports and commentaries, and 66% pertained to natural disasters. There was a paucity of articles on disaster mitigation or recovery, and more were written on disaster response and preparedness issues.DiscussionConsiderably more articles were published from high-income country settings that may reflect a publication bias. Current grey literature on disaster management tends not to be peer reviewed, is not well organised and not easy to access. The paucity of peer-reviewed publications compromises evidence review initiatives that seek to provide an evidence-base for disaster management in LMIC. As such, there is an urgent need for greater research and publication of findings on disaster management issues from these settings.

Barriers to evidence-based disaster management in Nepal: a qualitative study

“…Central to this is the availability and accessibility of the evidence-base. The evidencebase is known to be patchy (11) and there were difficulties reported acquiring, accessing and disseminating it. The lack of demand for the evidence, and different understanding as to what constitutes as evidence, further hampers the use of what is available.…”

“…What is available is meagre and not well applied, and there are significant hurdles to be overcome including contextual and system issues as well as political barriers. (11) It is too simplistic to see evidence-based practice solely in terms of individual interventions without recognition of the contributions made by the wider societal determinants. The relative influence of the different barriers will vary between countries, with political barriers being especially prominent in some countries such as Nepal where the system of governance and leadership is less well developed.…”

“…(10)H management particularly in low-and middle-income country (LMIC) settings is hampered by the paucity of the evidence-base. (8,11) There are also considerable uncertainties with regards to how evidence-based practice is best achieved. Reviews from high-income countries have identified various determinants and barriers to developing evidence-based practice in disaster management such as knowledge management issues, system configuration issues and behavioural aspects.…”

The changing health priorities of earthquake response and implications for preparedness: a scoping review

“…19 This uses a systematic search methodology whilst allowing for the review of a broader, less restrictive, range of evidence. We anticipated that most of the evidence was likely to be short reports [14][15][16][17] . Consequently, we intentionally adopted a more inclusive approach to include papers that might have been excluded in a more rigid systematic review format as we wanted to capture the full range of health impacts associated with this type of disaster.…”

“…Many are confined to a specific geographic area 12,13 whilst others have cited the lack of available good quality evidence 10,11 , a common problem encountered in disaster management research [14][15][16][17] .…”