Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background

Nurses constitute the frontline workforce in disaster response; however, in protracted conflict settings such as Palestine, disaster management occurs under compounded political, infrastructural, and resource constraints. These contextual stressors may intensify psychological burden, limit preparedness, and undermine system resilience.

Objective

To synthesize empirical evidence regarding the challenges experienced by nurses in disaster management in Palestine and to identify organizational and professional implications.

Methods

This mixed-methods systematic review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published between 2010 and 2025. Two independent reviewers performed screening, data extraction, and methodological appraisal using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools .A convergent integrated approach was employed to synthesize quantitative and qualitative findings.

Results

Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria. Four overarching themes were identified: (a) psychological burden, including stress, burnout, and moral distress; (b) preparedness and competency gaps; (c) organizational and systemic barriers such as infrastructure damage and movement restrictions; and (d) adaptive strategies and professional resilience. Despite significant constraints, nurses demonstrated contextual adaptability and commitment to patient care.

Conclusion

Disaster nursing in Palestine is shaped by intersecting structural, psychological, and operational challenges. Strengthening preparedness frameworks, workforce protection policies, and accessible psychosocial support systems is essential to enhance resilience and care quality in conflict-affected settings.

Keywords

Disaster management nurses Palestine preparedness resilience conflict

Introduction

Disasters whether armed conflicts, epidemics, or mass-casualty incidents place extraordinary strain on health systems, often exposing pre-existing structural vulnerabilities and intensifying the demands placed on frontline health professionals. Nurses are central actors in disaster management because they provide triage, emergency care, psychological support, and continuity of services across all phases of disaster response (Al Harthi et al., 2020). In conflict-affected and resource-limited settings, the responsibilities of nurses expand significantly due to shortages of personnel, limited infrastructure, and unstable operational environments.

The Palestinian context represents one of the most protracted and complex disaster environments globally. The Gaza Strip has experienced repeated large-scale escalations in 2008–2009, 2012, 2014, 2021, and most recently beginning in October 2023 resulting in unprecedented loss of life and damage to infrastructure. According to United Nations reports, the 2023–2024 war alone led to more than 34,000 deaths, over 78,000 injuries, and the destruction or damage of approximately 60% to 70% of healthcare facilities (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 2024). In the West Bank, clashes, restrictions on movement, and targeted attacks on healthcare settings have intensified, contributing to delays in access to care and increased operational hazards for healthcare workers (World Health Organization, 2023). These crises have produced extensive financial losses, widespread displacement, and persistent humanitarian needs, underscoring the urgent necessity for effective disaster management capacity among healthcare providers.

For nurses, disasters in Palestine create a unique confluence of psychological, logistical, and professional pressures. Studies consistently report high levels of stress, burnout, anxiety, and moral injury among nurses working during armed conflict or public health emergencies (Ahmead et al., 2024; Alqaissi et al., 2025; Malak et al., 2025). The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed systemic fragilities in the Palestinian health system, including shortages of personal protective equipment, inadequate surge capacity, and insufficient disaster preparedness training (Alser et al., 2021; Aqtam et al., 2024). Although nurses demonstrated strong commitment and adaptability throughout these crises, the magnitude of psychological distress indicates significant gaps in institutional support and preparedness frameworks. To clarify, previous studies revealed high psychological distress despite nurses’ resilience, meaning resilience helped sustain functioning but was insufficient to offset cumulative trauma.

Preparedness gaps and systemic barriers have been repeatedly identified in Palestinian healthcare facilities. Assessments of hospitals and primary healthcare centers highlight deficiencies in emergency protocols, inconsistent training, limited inter-agency coordination, and chronic shortages of essential supplies (Alrayyes et al., 2023; Amar et al., 2025; Hamshari et al., 2024). During conflicts, nurses often work under bombardment, navigate mobility restrictions, and manage mass-casualty events without adequate resources conditions that significantly compromise disaster response capacity (Miqdadi & Hamdan, 2024; Qtait et al., 2025a, 2025b). These structural constraints not only affect patient outcomes but also increase occupational risk and emotional burden among the nursing workforce.

While global disaster management frameworks emphasize preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery, applying these principles in Palestine is complicated by intermittent emergencies, political instability, and the protracted nature of humanitarian crises. Moreover, the absence of specialized disaster nursing curricula and limited access to continuing education restrict the development of advanced competencies among both practicing nurses and new graduates (Ayyad et al., 2025).

Against this backdrop, synthesizing existing evidence on nurses’ challenges in disaster situations is essential to inform policy, educational reform, and resource allocation. Previous reviews have examined general disaster preparedness among healthcare providers, yet no comprehensive mixed-method review has focused specifically on the multifaceted challenges encountered by nurses in Palestine a context where disasters are recurrent, layered, and deeply intertwined with structural determinants of health.

Therefore, this mixed-method systematic review synthesizes qualitative and quantitative evidence to examine the psychological, organizational, resource-related, and professional challenges faced by nurses in disaster management across the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. By integrating findings across methodologies, this review provides a comprehensive understanding of the barriers affecting nurses’ ability to respond effectively during disasters and highlights priority areas for strengthening preparedness, resilience, and systemic support within Palestinian healthcare.

Methods

Review Design

This systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement for reporting systematic reviews (Page et al., 2021). As this manuscript presents the completed review rather than a protocol, all reporting directly adheres to PRISMA 2020 standards (Supplemenatry Materials). Given the inclusion of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods primary studies, a mixed-methods systematic review design was adopted. The methodological procedures were guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis (Aromataris & Munn, 2020).

Eligibility Criteria

Studies were considered eligible if they examined nurses involved in disaster management within Palestine, including the Gaza Strip and/or the West Bank, and employed qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, or interventional designs. Eligible studies were required to report on challenges, preparedness, psychological impacts, organizational barriers, or adaptive strategies in disaster contexts and to have been published in peer-reviewed journals between 2010 and 2025 in the English language. Studies were excluded if nurses were not the primary participants, if the focus was unrelated to disaster or emergency contexts, if the publication consisted of editorials or commentaries without empirical data, or if insufficient methodological detail was provided.

Search Strategy

A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The search strategy combined controlled vocabulary, including MeSH terms where applicable, and free-text keywords related to nursing, disaster management, emergency preparedness, conflict, war, and Palestine. Boolean operators, truncation, and phrase searching were used to enhance sensitivity and specificity. The complete database-specific search strategies, including full search strings and date limits, are provided in Supplementary File 1. In addition to database searching, reference lists of all included studies were manually screened to identify further relevant publications.

Study Selection

All retrieved records were exported into reference management software, and duplicate entries were removed prior to screening. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts against the predefined eligibility criteria. Full texts of potentially relevant studies were subsequently assessed independently by both reviewers. Disagreements at any stage of screening were resolved through discussion and consensus, with a third reviewer available if required. The study selection process is presented in the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram in the “Results” section. The detailed study identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and inclusion process is presented in the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram describing study selection for systematic review.

Quality Appraisal

Methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the appropriate JBI critical appraisal checklists (Joanna Briggs Institute, 2020), in accordance with the JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis (Aromataris & Munn, 2020). The checklist applied depended on study design. Qualitative studies were assessed using the JBI Checklist for Qualitative Research, cross-sectional studies using the JBI Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies, and experimental or interventional studies using the relevant JBI experimental appraisal tool. For mixed-methods studies, qualitative and quantitative components were appraised separately using their corresponding tools. Each criterion was rated as “Yes,” “No,” “Unclear,” or “Not Applicable.” Any discrepancies between reviewers were resolved through discussion to ensure reliability of appraisal decisions. In accordance with JBI guidance for mixed-method reviews, no study was excluded solely on the basis of quality appraisal; however, appraisal outcomes informed the interpretation and weighting of evidence in the synthesis. A detailed summary of the appraisal findings is presented in Table 1 in the “Results” section.

Table 1.

Quality Assessment.

Study (Author, Year)	Design	JBI Score	Quality Rating	Notes
Aljamal (2024)	Qualitative	9/10	High	Clear aim, robust methods; limited reflexivity.
Aljamal et al. (2023)	Qualitative	8/10	High	Strong data; sampling/researcher influence not fully described.
Alqaissi et al. (2025)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	Large sample; confounder control incomplete.
Alrayyes et al. (2023)	Cross-sectional	7/8	High	Facility assessment; response rate limited.
Hamshari et al. (2024)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	Methods OK; confounders/sampling sparse.
Aqtam et al. (2024)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	Survey; instrument validity unclear.
Said et al. (2022)	Experimental	7/9	High	Training intervention; some randomization/blinding unclear.
Alser et al. (2021)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	Reported PPE/training gaps; sampling unclear.
Mahamid et al. (2022)	Qualitative	8/10	High	Good methodology; sample details limited.
Miqdadi and Hamdan (2024)	Qualitative exploratory	8/10	High	Stakeholder perspectives; reflexivity/recruitment limited.
Al Harthi et al. (2020)	Qualitative	9/10	High	Rich contextual data; credible methods.
Amar et al. (2025)	Mixed-methods	9/10/7/8	High	Mixed design; quantitative confounding unclear.
Malak et al. (2025)	Cross-sectional	7/8	High	Large sample; some sampling frame details missing.
Ahmead et al. (2024)	Cross-sectional	7/8	High	Large sample; confounder modelling unclear.
Aldabbour et al. (2025)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	Clear outcomes; sampling unclear.
Ismail (2022)	Quantitative thesis	6/8	Moderate	Limited methodological details.
Veronese and Pepe (2022)	Longitudinal	9/11	Moderate–High	Two-wave design; some cohort details missing.
Albelbeisi et al. (2024)	Cross-sectional	7/8	High	Occupational stress reported; sampling limited.
Abed and Etewa (2025)	Qualitative	8/10	High	In-depth impact accounts; researcher positioning not explicit.
Aqtam et al. (2023)	Cross-sectional	6/8	Moderate	ICU nurses; sampling unclear.
Qtait et al. (2025a, 2025b)	Cross-sectional	7/8	High	Sample (n = 171); confounder adjustment limited.
Smadi et al. (2025)*	Qualitative	9/10	High	Duplicate; keep one record.

Data Extraction

A structured data extraction form was developed based on JBI guidance. Extracted information included authorship, year of publication, study design, setting, participant characteristics, disaster context, key findings related to disaster management challenges, and methodological quality indicators. Data extraction was conducted independently by two reviewers, and discrepancies were resolved through consensus to enhance methodological rigor.

Data Synthesis

Given the methodological heterogeneity across included studies, including variations in design, outcomes, and measurement tools, statistical meta-analysis was not appropriate. Instead, data were synthesized using the JBI convergent integrated approach for mixed-methods systematic reviews (Aromataris & Munn, 2020). This approach enables integration of qualitative and quantitative evidence within a unified analytical framework.

Quantitative findings were first summarized narratively. Where necessary, quantitative results were transformed into qualitative descriptions to facilitate integration with qualitative data, consistent with JBI methodological guidance. Subsequently, all findings were coded inductively. Codes were grouped into conceptually similar categories, and these categories were then synthesized into overarching themes that captured shared patterns across study designs. The synthesis process was iterative and conducted collaboratively by two reviewers to ensure analytical consistency and minimize interpretive bias.

Ethical Considerations

As this review synthesized data from previously published studies and did not involve primary data collection, ethical approval was not required.

Results

A total of 23 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The included studies were conducted between 2020 and 2025, with 12 using cross-sectional designs, 8 using qualitative methods, 1 longitudinal quantitative study, 1 experimental (quasi-experimental) study, and 1 mixed-methods study. All studies were conducted within the Palestinian context, covering the Gaza Strip, West Bank, or both, with one multi-region study in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Quality Assessment

The methodological quality of all included studies by using appraised using the JBI, Critical Appraisal Tools, selecting the appropriate instrument for each study design. Specifically, the JBI Checklist for Researches in the reviews.

The studies were evaluated by two reviewers independently conducted the appraisal. Discrepancies in scoring or interpretation were resolved through discussion, a third reviewer adjudicated. This multi-stage review process ensured reliability and reduced bias in the evaluation of quality methodological.

Appraisal criteria included clarity of research aims, appropriateness of methodology, and number of sampling, validity and reliability of outcome measures, ethical suitable, and transparency in the analysis. For qualitative studies, additional emphasis was placed on congruence between philosophical view and methods, researcher reflexivity, and the representation of participants’ voices representation. Quantitative studies were assessed for sampling use, measurement validity, confounding control, and statistical clarity evaluated.

For overall appraisal evaluation indicated that the included evidence ranged from moderate to high quality. For the qualitative studies demonstrated strong methodological appear coherence with clear data collection and analysis processes, although reflexivity was occasionally underreported. For Cross-sectional studies commonly provided sufficient sampling descriptions and valid outcome measures, but some appear limitations in confounder adjustment or sampling frames. Experimental and longitudinal studies contributed strong findings but sometimes lacked detailed reporting of intervention No study was excluded based solely on its appraisal score, in line with JBI recommendations for mixed-method reviews, as even studies with moderate methodological limitations contributed meaningful contextual insights into disaster-related challenges. A detailed summary of the critical appraisal for each study, including individual JBI checklist scores and criteria ratings, is presented in Table 1.

The studies addressed a range of disaster contexts, including pandemics (particularly COVID-19), armed conflicts, and other mass-casualty or emergency events. Four main thematic areas emerged from the synthesis of the included studies:

Psychological Impacts on Nurses

Multiple studies highlighted the profound psychological toll of working in disaster contexts, particularly during armed conflict and pandemics. Nurses frequently reported high levels of stress, anxiety, depression, burnout, and moral injury, often linked to prolonged exposure to traumatic events, high patient loads, and resource scarcity (Ahmead et al., 2024; Aldabbour et al., 2025; Ismail, 2022; Malak et al., 2025; Veronese & Pepe, 2022). For example, Alqaissi et al. (2025) found that nurses in the South West Bank experienced significant psychological distress and burnout during the war on Gaza, while Ahmead et al. (2024) and Aldabbour et al. (2025) documented elevated rates of emotional exhaustion among health professionals during wartime (Abed & Etewa, 2025). Longitudinal findings by Veronese and Pepe (2022) further indicated that distress and burnout can persist over time, even beyond the acute phase of emergencies (Veronese & Pepe, 2022).

Preparedness and Response Capacity

Several studies revealed critical gaps in nurses’ disaster preparedness, with deficiencies in training, equipment, and established protocols (Hamshari et al., 2024); Alrayyes et al. (2023) reported significant weaknesses in primary healthcare centers’ emergency readiness in Gaza, while Aqtam et al. (2024) identified insufficient preparedness among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Even when preparedness training was implemented, such as in the psychological first aid program evaluated by Said et al. (2022), coverage was inconsistent and often not mandatory.

Organizational and Systemic Barriers

Structural challenges in the Palestinian healthcare system, including movement restrictions, damaged infrastructure, and limited inter-agency coordination, were frequently reported. Qtait et al. (2025a, 2025b); Smadi et al. (2025); Hamshari et al. (2024) found that resource shortages and weak coordination hindered emergency response in primary healthcare settings. Amar et al. (2025) revealed gaps in disaster plans and the absence of regular drills in West Bank hospitals. Communication breakdowns and unclear leadership structures further complicated rapid response efforts (Malak et al., 2025).

Adaptive Strategies and Resilience

Despite the constraints, many nurses demonstrated significant adaptability and resilience, developing improvisational solutions to deliver care under extreme conditions. Abed and Etewa (2025); Albelbeisi et al. (2024); Aldabbour et al. (2025); Smadi et al. (2025) described how pediatric emergency nurses in Gaza adjusted clinical practices during active bombardment. Malak et al. (2025) highlighted the role of leadership support, teamwork, and resource availability in sustaining work engagement. Studies such as Aqtam et al. (2023) also found that higher resilience levels were associated with lower stress among ICU nurses during the pandemic (Abed & Etewa, 2025).

These thematic areas reflect a combination of acute and chronic challenges that Palestinian nurses face in disaster contexts, reinforcing the need for multifaceted interventions. Addressing these issues requires not only the provision of adequate resources and training but also the development of robust psychological support systems, institutional preparedness protocols, and policies to enhance resilience at both the individual and systemic levels (Al Harthi et al., 2020; Aljamal, 2024; Aljamal et al., 2023; Alrayyes et al., 2023; Miqdadi & Hamdan, 2024; Said et al., 2022).

Discussion

The findings of this mixed-method systematic review demonstrate that nurses in Palestine face an exceptionally complex array of challenges when responding to disasters, shaped by recurrent armed conflict, chronic resource shortages, and fragile health infrastructure. Across the included studies, four integrated themes emerged: psychological impacts, preparedness gaps, organizational and systemic barriers, and adaptive resilience. These findings align with global literature on disaster nursing (Al Harthi et al., 2020), yet also reveal context-specific dynamics that intensify the burden on Palestinian nurses.

A central theme was the psychological strain experienced by nurses during disasters. High levels of stress, burnout, traumatic exposure, and moral injury were consistently reported in studies conducted during both war and the COVID-19 pandemic (Ahmead et al., 2024; Alqaissi et al., 2025; Malak et al., 2025). These findings are further supported by recent evidence: Qtait et al. (2025a, 2025b) documented severe post-traumatic stress symptoms and a marked decline in quality of life among nurses during the October 7 Gaza war, illustrating the cumulative effects of repeated exposure to mass-casualty events. Similar psychological patterns have been observed in other conflict-affected regions—including Lebanon (Bou Sanayeh et al., 2022), Syria (Al Ahmad et al., 2024; Fares, 2023), and Ukraine (Sydorenko et al., 2025) where healthcare professionals show persistent distress following war-related disasters. Collectively, these findings indicate that psychological harm among nurses is not episodic but deeply embedded within conditions of prolonged insecurity.

Although several studies highlighted the presence of coping strategies and individual resilience, the synthesis demonstrates that resilience cannot compensate for systemic inadequacies. As Qtait and Alarab (2018) argued in earlier Palestinian nursing research, individual strategies—such as time management or personal coping are insufficient without supportive organizational structures. The current review reinforces this conclusion, showing that resilience often reflects necessity rather than institutional strength.

The review also identified significant deficiencies in disaster preparedness, including inadequate emergency training (Aqtam et al., 2024; Said et al., 2022), inconsistent protocols (Amar et al., 2025), and limited access to personal protective equipment (Alser et al., 2021). Whereas international frameworks emphasize routine drills, mandatory training, and standardized protocols, preparedness in many Palestinian healthcare facilities remains fragmented and inconsistent (Alrayyes et al., 2023; Hamshari et al., 2024). This gap is particularly concerning given the frequency of disasters in Palestine, including pandemics, violent escalations, and mass-casualty incidents.

In addition to educational and individual challenges, organizational and systemic barriers were widely documented. Movement restrictions, damaged health infrastructure, under-resourced facilities, and weak inter-agency coordination were recurrent obstacles across studies (Miqdadi & Hamdan, 2024; Qtait et al., 2025a, 2025b; Smadi et al., 2025). Nurses often worked under bombardment, navigated dangerous travel routes, and operated in overcrowded or partially destroyed facilities. Comparable systemic challenges have been reported in Syria (Al Ahmad et al., 2024; Fares, 2023) and Sudan (Ahmed et al., 2025), but the Palestinian context is further complicated by decades of occupation, chronic blockade, and severe restrictions on mobility conditions that convert disaster response into a continuous, rather than intermittent, necessity.

Despite these substantial constraints, many studies highlighted adaptive strategies and strong professional commitment among nurses, including improvisation, teamwork, and leadership-supported coordination (Albelbeisi et al., 2024; Aldabbour et al., 2025; Smadi et al., 2025). Researchers described how nurses restructured workflows, redistributed responsibilities, and developed informal support systems to sustain care delivery during emergencies (Abed & Etewa, 2025). These adaptations underscore the ingenuity and dedication of Palestinian nurses but also reveal the structural inequities that compel healthcare workers to compensate for systemic failures.

Overall, the integrated findings show that psychological distress, low preparedness, and systemic barriers are mutually reinforcing. Psychological strain increases when preparedness is low; preparedness is weakened by organizational constraints; and organizational limitations intensify under recurrent conflict. Addressing these interrelated challenges requires a multi-level strategy that incorporates enhanced institutional planning, mandatory disaster training, and comprehensive psychological support systems. Strengthening these areas is essential for improving both nurse well-being and the effectiveness of disaster response across Palestinian healthcare facilities.

Finally, this review provides the first integrated mixed-method synthesis focused specifically on Palestinian nurses’ experiences during disasters. By combining qualitative and quantitative evidence, it presents a nuanced and context-sensitive understanding of the barriers that shape disaster response. Future studies should employ longitudinal and interventional designs to examine the long-term impacts of repeated disasters on nurses’ psychological health and to evaluate the effectiveness of system-level preparedness interventions.

Strengths and Limitations

The review's strengths include its status as the first mixed-method synthesis focused specifically on Palestinian nurses’ challenges in disaster contexts, the use of JBI's convergent integrated approach to integrate diverse forms of evidence, and a rigorous multi-database search with independent dual-reviewer screening that reduced bias and enhanced methodological reliability. However, several limitations should be noted: most included studies were cross-sectional and relied on self-reported data, which may introduce response bias and limit causal interpretation; the exclusion of grey literature may have omitted relevant local insights; and the uneven geographic distribution of studies, with greater representation from Gaza than the West Bank, may affect generalizability. Variability in methodological rigor across studies also influenced the overall strength of the synthesized evidence.

Implications for Practice

This review underscores the urgent need for a national disaster management framework in Palestine that defines nursing roles, ensures resources, and strengthens coordination. Mandatory standardized training and structured psychological support are essential to enhance preparedness and resilience. Future research should adopt longitudinal designs and address under-studied settings. Progress requires collaboration among health authorities, nursing schools, humanitarian agencies, and international partners.

Conclusion

This systematic review reveals that nurses in Palestine face complex, interrelated challenges in disaster management, shaped by ongoing armed conflict, chronic resource shortages, and systemic healthcare limitations. Evidence across pandemics, wars, and mass-casualty events highlights psychological strain, gaps in preparedness, and organizational barriers that hinder effective response. Yet, Palestinian nurses continue to demonstrate adaptability and resilience, often relying on improvised strategies to sustain care under extreme conditions. Addressing these challenges requires a coordinated, multi-level approach, including enhanced disaster preparedness training, investment in healthcare infrastructure, and comprehensive psychological support. Prioritizing these areas will strengthen workforce resilience and capacity, enabling nurses to safeguard both patient health and their own well-being in future crises.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-son-10.1177_23779608261434445 - Supplemental material for Challenges Faced by Nurses in Disaster Management in Palestine: A Systematic Review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-son-10.1177_23779608261434445 for Challenges Faced by Nurses in Disaster Management in Palestine: A Systematic Review by Mohammad Qtait, Nawaf Amro, Nesreen Alqaissi, Khalaf Awwad, Fuad Farajalla, Zeenat Mesk, Eman Tobasi and Ashraf Jehad Abuejheisheh in SAGE Open Nursing

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-son-10.1177_23779608261434445 - Supplemental material for Challenges Faced by Nurses in Disaster Management in Palestine: A Systematic Review

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-son-10.1177_23779608261434445 for Challenges Faced by Nurses in Disaster Management in Palestine: A Systematic Review by Mohammad Qtait, Nawaf Amro, Nesreen Alqaissi, Khalaf Awwad, Fuad Farajalla, Zeenat Mesk, Eman Tobasi and Ashraf Jehad Abuejheisheh in SAGE Open Nursing

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the nurses who had participated in this study.

ORCID iDs

Mohammad Qtait

Nawaf Amro

Nesreen Alqaissi

Ashraf Jehad Abuejheisheh

Consent for Publication

Not applicable. This manuscript does not contain any individual person’s data in any form (including individual details as name, images, or videos).

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Availability of Data and Materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Abed

F. Y.

Etewa

B. B.

(2025). The perspective view of nurses in Ramallah Complex Hospital regarding the impact of the October 7 war on professional duties, economic status, and mental and social well-being. Journal of Arts, Literature, Humanities and Social Sciences, 23(119), 392–412. https://www.jalhss.com

Ahmead

El Sharif

Alwawi

Hemeid

Ziqan

(2024). The prevalence of burnout and coping strategies among Palestinian health professionals: A cross sectional study. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1477812. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1477812

Ahmed

M. B. M.

Ahmed

A. B. M.

Alrawa

Mustafa

L. E. E.

Ali

M. E. M.

Abdalla

M. O. O.

Ahmed

S. M. M

. (2025). Burnout and coping mechanisms among Sudanese healthcare workers during the ongoing Sudan war: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 20(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-025-00472-7

Al Ahmad

N. A.

Mohamed

Aldaeif

Al Abedalrzak

Aldugiem

(2024). Burnout and job satisfaction among nurses in northwestern Syria during war time. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 15(2), 104–113. https://doi.org/10.14744/phd.2024.56667

Albelbeisi

A. H.

Al-Amoudi

S. M.

Anabri

Obaid

H. A.

Alijla

Kakemam

(2024). Occupational stress and associated sources and risk factors among nurses in Gaza strip, Palestine: A cross-sectional survey. Nursing Open, 11(8), e70004. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.70004

Aldabbour

Dardas

L. A.

Hamed

Alagha

Alsaiqali

El-shanti

Al-Aydi

Warda

R. A.

Madi

Abumusameh

Hedeeb

(2025). Emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment: Exploring burnout in Gaza’s healthcare workforce during the war. Middle East Current Psychiatry, 32(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43045-025-00405-2

Al Harthi

Al Thobaity

Al Ahmari

Almalki

(2020). Challenges for nurses in disaster management: A scoping review. Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 13, 2627–2634. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S279513

Aljamal

B. A.

Nimer

Zroog

S. A.

Aljeesh

(2023). Challenges and obstacles during Covid-19 pandemic crisis management faced by the Palestinian ministry of health in the Gaza Strip. Palestinian International Journal for Applied Sciences and Technology, 7(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.52865/PUTC4814

Aljamal

B. A.

(2024). Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic crisis management in the Gaza Strip: A qualitative study. Journal of the Arab American University, 10(2), 11–36. https://digitalcommons.aaru.edu.jo/aaup/vol10/iss2/10

10.

Alqaissi

Qtait

Jaradat

Aburayyan

Awwad

K. A.

Mesk

Amna Mojahed

A. W.

Tarteel Abu Snineh

N. M.

Omar Khamayesh

A.J

Al-Janazreh

Nimer

(2025). Psychological challenges of nurses working at hospitals in South West Bank, during war on Gaza Strip. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 19, e209. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2025.10105

11.

Alrayyes

M. A.

Alaila

B. H.

Aldalou

M. R. R.

Omamalin

N. G. D.

(2023). The emergency preparedness of level-four primary health care centers in the Gaza Strip, the occupied Palestinian territory: An assessment of primary care providers’ competencies and facilities preparedness. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 38(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X22002357

12.

Alser

Alghoul

Alkhateeb

Hamdan

Albarqouni

Saini

(2021). Healthcare workers preparedness for COVID-19 pandemic in the occupied Palestinian territory: A cross-sectional survey. BMC Health Services Research, 21(1), 766. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06804-7

13.

Amar

B. W.

Khader

I. A.

Jallad

Said

N. B.

Hani

S. B.

ALBashtawy

Ababneh

Alshloul

Albashtawy

(2025). Evaluation of West Bank hospitals’ disaster preparedness plans using a mixed-methods approach. Journal of Emergency Management, 23(2), 301–311. https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.0891

14.

Aqtam

Ayed

Toqan

Salameh

Abd Elhay

E. S.

Zaben

Mohammad Shouli

(2023). The relationship between stress and resilience of nurses in intensive care units during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inquiry: A Journal of Medical Care Organization, Provision and Financing, 60, 469580231179876. https://doi.org/10.1177/00469580231179876

15.

Aqtam

Shouli

Al-Qoroum

Shouli

Ayed

(2024). Evaluating disaster management preparedness among healthcare professionals during pandemics: Palestinian context. SAGE Open Nursing, 10, 23779608241283698. https://doi.org/10.1177/23779608241283698

16.

Aromataris

Munn

(Eds.). (2020). JBI manual for evidence synthesis. Joanna Briggs Institute. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01

17.

Ayyad

F. A.

Abdalsalam

Abdalla

Hamza

S. B.

Alshareif

B. A.

Ayyad

A. A.

Salih

Hassan

Mamdouh

Emad

Adil

Abdelgader

Mohammed

Adam

Salahaldin

Shiekh

Tageldin

Mamoun

Alamir

Hassan

M. E.

(2025). Perceived disaster preparedness, knowledge, and skills among Sudanese healthcare professionals during the armed conflict: Cross-sectional study, 2024. BMC Emergency Medicine, 25(1), 79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-025-01238-4

18.

Bou Sanayeh

El Chamieh

Saade

M. C.

Maalouf

R. G.

Bizri

(2022). Post-traumatic stress symptoms experienced by healthcare workers in Lebanon four months following Beirut's ammonium nitrate explosion: A survey-based study. Archives of Public Health, 80(1), 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-022-00911-5

19.

Fares

A. R.

(2023). The ethical challenges experienced by healthcare workers during the war in Syria: A qualitative research project and comparison with ethics frameworks. Universitätsverlag Göttingen. https://doi.org/10.17875/gup2023-2330

20.

Hamshari

Hamadneh

Ghneem

Khalaf

Daqqa

Alwafa

R. A.

Ktaifan

(2024). Barriers faced by primary healthcare providers in addressing emergencies in the Northern region of Palestine before and during the Gaza war. BMC Primary Care, 25(1), 261. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02512-3

21.

Ismail

F. J.

(2022). The level of stress, anxiety, depression and its association with burnout among emergency nurses in Palestine [Master’s thesis]. Arab American University.

22.

Joanna Briggs Institute. (2020). Critical appraisal tools. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools

23.

Mahamid

F. A.

Veronese

Bdier

(2022). The Palestinian health-care providers’ perceptions, challenges and human rights-related concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Human Rights in Healthcare, 15(4), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHRH-08-2021-0187

24.

Malak

M. Z.

Zahran

Swalmeh

Albana

(2025). Factors correlating work engagement among Palestinian emergency nurses during Gaza war in the West Bank. International Emergency Nursing, 78, 101567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ienj.2024.101567

25.

Miqdadi

Hamdan

(2024). Key stakeholders’ perspectives of public health emergency preparedness in Palestine: A qualitative exploratory study. Public Health, 237, 232–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2024.10.013

26.

Page

M. J.

McKenzie

J. E.

Bossuyt

P. M.

Boutron

Hoffmann

T. C.

Mulrow

C. D.

Shamseer

Tetzlaff

J. M.

Akl

E. A.

Brennan

S. E.

Chou

Glanville

Grimshaw

J. M.

Hróbjartsson

Lalu

M. M.

Loder

E. W.

Mayo-Wilson

McDonald

McGuinness

L. A.

, … Moher

(2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

27.

Qtait

Alarab

(2018). Definition and types of time management obstacles for nursing. International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science, 3(10), 2243–2247. https://doi.org/10.23958/ijirms/vol03-i10/451

28.

Qtait

Alqaissi

Farajalla

Jaradat

Awwad

(2025a). Impact of the October 7 Gaza war on post-traumatic stress symptoms and quality of life in Palestinian nursing. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 34575. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-18039-1

29.

Qtait

Elayan

R. M.

Alshaikh

A. Z.

Alshaikh

L. K.

Awwad

R. M.

Rajabi

R. Z.

Salahat

A. A.

Karkour

T. I.

(2025b). The challenges of an emergency nurse team working in an active conflict area. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 19, e60. https://doi.org/10.1017/dmp.2025.53

30.

Said

N. B.

Molassiotis

Chiang

V. C. L.

(2022). Psychological first aid training in disaster preparedness for nurses working with emergencies and traumas. International Nursing Review, 69(4), 548–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12749

31.

Smadi

Ghali

Rizek

Al-Zubi

Irfan

Awad

Wentz

Koujah

Muhammad

(2025). Pediatric emergency nursing in Gaza: Challenges, adaptations, and lessons from a conflict zone. SAGE Open Nursing, 11, 23779608251349070. https://doi.org/10.1177/23779608251349070

32.

Sydorenko

A. Y.

Kiel

Spindler

(2025). Psychosocial challenges of Ukrainian healthcare professionals in wartime: Addressing the need for management support. Social Science & Medicine, 364, 117504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117504

33.

United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. (2024). Hostilities in the Gaza Strip and Israel: Flash update. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. https://www.ochaopt.org

34.

Veronese

Pepe

(2022). Psychological distress, professional burnout, and trauma in Palestinian health care helpers: A two-wave quantitative longitudinal study. Psychological Trauma, 14(4), 523–534. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000941

35.

World Health Organization. (2023). Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including east Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan: Report by the Director-General. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB

0.02 MB