People with disabilities face disproportionate risks during disasters, yet their everyday capacities for preparedness remain underexplored within community‐based care research. This study examined how individuals with physical and sensory disabilities in Japan prepare for disasters in their home environments, using the Disaster Preparedness Checklist Kit—a participatory tool co‐developed with people with disabilities. A mixed‐methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected from 67 participants across seven prefectures, and semistructured interviews were conducted with 11 individuals who contributed to the kit’s development. The checklist assessed preparedness across six domains: (1) General Preparations, (2) Human Services and Relationship Building, (3) Communication and Information Gathering, (4) Mobility and Transportation, (5) Food, Health and Elimination and (6) Shelters and Public Facilities. Thematic analysis of interview data complemented statistical findings. Results indicated that overall preparedness levels were low, particularly in Human Services and Relationship Building, Mobility and Transportation, and Shelters and Public Facilities. Five recurring action patterns were identified: checking and trying, consultation and discussion, forming habits and organising, substituting, and obtaining and implementing. Participants demonstrated creative self‐management and mutual support strategies but faced persistent barriers related to mobility, communication accessibility and economic constraints. These findings highlight that disaster preparedness for people with disabilities is not solely an individual responsibility but a shared outcome of social inclusion, welfare systems and accessible community infrastructure. Strengthening preparedness requires policies and practices that integrate disability perspectives into local disaster planning and support everyday capability‐building within community care settings. By recognising people with disabilities as active agents of resilience rather than passive recipients of aid, this study contributes to the development of inclusive disaster‐preparedness approaches aligned with the principles of community‐based health and social care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koyama et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: