Scoping review maps essential competencies for physiotherapists in emergencies, indicating their critical role in care and rehabilitation.
Introduction: Public health emergencies and disasters cause severe disruptions to health systems, increase care demands, and require coordinated, ethical, and technically qualified responses. Physiotherapists play a strategic role in these contexts, contributing to care, rehabilitation, maintenance of essential services, and support for the functional recovery of victims and their families, although their inclusion in disaster planning and response remains underexplored and insufficiently recognized. Objective: To map the ethical, technical, and non-technical competencies considered essential or recommended for physiotherapists working in public health emergencies and disasters. Methods: This scoping review protocol is aligned with JBI methodology. Searches will be conducted in bibliographic databases and grey literature sources. Complete publications will be included, with no language or publication-period restrictions, provided they describe competencies or responsibilities of physiotherapists in public health emergencies and disasters. The review will be guided by the PCC mnemonic: Participants (physiotherapists), Concept (ethical, technical, and non-technical competencies), and Context (public health emergencies and disasters). Abstracts, incomplete studies, and publications that do not answer the review question will be excluded. Finally, two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts. Disagreements will be resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer. Data will be extracted using a previously tested, developed, and piloted instrument, which may be refined during the process. Results: The results will be presented through graphs, flowcharts, tables, and diagrams, accompanied by a narrative synthesis aligned with the review objective and question.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simião et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: