The literature review was conducted using the following online databases: Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PubMed, searching for abstracts and content from 2014–2025 (see Figure 1). We followed procedures related to literature study, such as using general keywords, identifying a research topic (emergency psychology, intervention methodologies and strategies, psychological first aid, calamities, catastrophes, disasters, trauma, cataclysm), and defining conceptual maps (intersection circles between different themes and processes) within qualitative research.

The inclusion criteria were: (a) indexed articles or book chapters, (b) articles written in English, (c) journals, and (d) areas of application in which emergency psychology operates; (e) methodologies, approaches, and strategies used to manage an event where emergency psychology was employed, (f) articles citing emergency psychology in the period January 2024–January 2025; (g) the use of the following keywords (emergency psychology, intervention methodologies and strategies, psychological first aid, calamities, catastrophe, disaster, trauma, cataclysm).

The database search yielded a total of 854 articles. Of these, 332 were identified from ScienceDirect, 221 from Scopus, and 301 from PubMed. A second phase involved screening titles and abstracts. In this phase, 72 articles were excluded as they were not relevant to the field of emergency psychology. Abstracts of 782 articles were read, from which the most cited emergency areas were identified and considered as inclusion criterion (a): COVID-19; Psychological First Aid (PFA); pregnancy; terrorist attacks; earthquakes; resilience and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In a further screening step, 662 articles that did not meet inclusion criterion (a) were excluded. In the third phase, the remaining 120 articles that met inclusion criterion (a) were read in full. It emerged that only 27 fully complied with both inclusion criteria (a and b) Figure 1 illustrates this process.

The assessment tools used are the clarity of study objectives, the adequacy of study design, the validity of results, and the bibliographic value of the findings. Given the complexity of the topic, we divided the general theme into sub-concepts, called intersection areas. The authors of this work supervised the selection process, which took place in three distinct phases. First, articles were analyzed according to inclusion criteria; second, articles were evaluated based on title and abstract; and third, they were directly acquired.

As with any analytical method in qualitative research, document analysis required examining the data and interpreting it to obtain meaning and understanding, as well as to develop empirical knowledge (Rapley, 2011; Corbin and Strauss, 2008). The results of this review were reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al., 2021). Based on the type of our work, the critical appraisal tool used in this research is the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills CASP Systematic Review checklist, 2023). This checklist is based on several criteria including Focused Question, Right Papers, All Studies Included, Quality Assessed, Reasonable Combination, Overall Results, Precision, Local Application, Outcomes Considered, and Benefits Worth Costs (Table 1).

The balance between job demands and the resources needed to effectively address them has emerged as a key factor in preventing mental health problems among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. This approach, based on the Job Demands-Resource model, was explored in detail by Gálvez-Herrer et al. (2021) in the Spanish context. Their research highlighted how this balance can prevent issues such as burnout, anxiety, and depression, which were particularly prevalent among healthcare workers during the crisis. This study underscores the importance of organizational factors in individual coping, suggesting that effective coping strategies must be supported by appropriate workplace policies and resources, also in mental health (Iudici et al., 2022).

Practical training in disaster preparedness skills has proven particularly effective in improving operators’ perception of self-efficacy. This aspect was highlighted by Iqbal et al. (2022) through workshops conducted at Idaho State University. Their study demonstrated tangible improvements in participants’ knowledge and perception of self-efficacy, emphasizing the importance of integrating practical exercises into emergency operator training. This research points to the value of experiential learning in developing coping skills, suggesting that theoretical knowledge alone may be insufficient in preparing individuals for the realities of emergency situations.

The value of peer support and sharing experiences in structured contexts was underlined by Rossi et al. (2021), who analyzed the effectiveness of focus groups in the “Pronto Psy – COVID-19” service in Italy. Their research revealed how sharing experiences in a structured context can not only alleviate individual stress but also contribute to the development of collective coping strategies. This finding highlights the social dimension of coping, suggesting that effective coping strategies often emerge through collaborative processes rather than individual efforts alone.

A more holistic approach to coping, which includes the entire family unit, was proposed by Foster et al. (2019) in the context of pediatric emergencies. Their study highlighted the importance of cognitive-behavioral strategies that involve the whole family, suggesting that coping strategies in emergencies should be conceived more broadly, considering the individual’s social context. This research expands the scope of coping interventions beyond the individual, recognizing the interconnected nature of stress and resilience within family systems.

The collective findings from these studies point toward a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of coping skill development in emergency situations. They suggest a move away from purely individualistic models of coping toward more contextual, social, and systemic approaches. This evolution in thinking recognizes that effective coping is not just about individual psychological resources, but also about the broader social, organizational, and familial contexts in which individuals operate.

Moreover, these methodologies highlight the importance of proactive skill development and preparation, rather than reactive responses to stress. They suggest that building coping skills should be an ongoing process, integrated into professional training and organizational practices, rather than a last-minute intervention during crises.

The emphasis on practical skills and experiential learning, as seen in the Idaho State University study, represents an important development. It recognizes that coping in emergency situations often requires quick, intuitive responses that are best developed through hands-on experience and practice.

The focus on peer support and collective coping strategies, highlighted in the Italian study, also offers valuable insights. It suggests that creating opportunities for shared reflection and mutual support can be a powerful tool in developing resilience, both at individual and group levels.

Finally, the holistic, family-centered approach proposed in the pediatric emergency context opens up new avenues for intervention. It suggests that effective coping strategies must consider the broader social systems in which individuals are embedded, recognizing that stress and resilience often have ripple effects beyond the individual.

In conclusion, these methodologies for developing coping skills reflect a growing recognition of the complex, multifaceted nature of resilience in emergency situations. They point toward more holistic, context-sensitive, and proactive approaches that have the potential to significantly improve both individual and collective capacity to handle crises. The challenge moving forward will be to integrate these diverse insights into comprehensive training programs and organizational practices that can effectively prepare individuals and systems for the unpredictable challenges of emergency situations.

The resilience of healthcare leaders has emerged as a crucial factor in post-emergency social adaptation. The “R2” model, studied by Giordano et al. (2022), identified key protective factors such as interpersonal relationships, optimism, and organizational flexibility. This innovative study suggests that improving leaders’ resilience can have a cascading effect on the entire healthcare system, reducing perceived stress and burnout symptoms at all levels. The implications of this research are far-reaching, as it shifts the focus from individual resilience to systemic resilience, recognizing the pivotal role that leaders play in shaping organizational responses to crises.

At the community level, the fundamental role of local volunteering and the importance of integrating civil society into disaster response systems were highlighted by Hakkim and Deb (2023) in their study on the response to floods in Kerala. Their research challenges the traditional top-down approach to emergency management, emphasizing the importance of decentralizing power to local entities to promote more resilient communities. This paradigm shift toward community-led disaster response represents a significant evolution in emergency management thinking. It acknowledges the unique insights and capabilities that local communities possess, which are often overlooked in centralized response models.

The convergence of these two perspectives – leadership resilience and community empowerment – points toward a more holistic and adaptive approach to social adaptation in emergencies. It suggests that effective emergency response systems should be designed to harness both top-down leadership capabilities and bottom-up community engagement. This dual approach could potentially lead to more robust and flexible emergency response mechanisms that are better equipped to handle the complexities and uncertainties of diverse crisis situations.

Furthermore, the emphasis on social adaptation highlights the need for long-term thinking in emergency preparedness. Rather than focusing solely on immediate response, these methodologies encourage the development of sustained resilience at both individual and community levels. This approach could potentially reduce the long-term psychological and social impacts of emergencies, leading to faster recovery and increased preparedness for future crises.

Preventive interventions aimed at reducing negative self-evaluations of victims and the therapeutic value of survivor groups were explored by Stancombe et al. (2022) in the context of the 2017 Manchester attack. Their study highlighted how participation in survivor groups can have long-term beneficial effects, representing a shift from more traditional intervention models. This research underscores the importance of peer support and shared experiences in the recovery process, suggesting that psychological interventions should not only focus on individual therapy but also on creating supportive communities among survivors.

An integrated approach to disaster preparedness, combining emotional support and practical skills, was proposed and tested by James et al. (2020) in Haiti. Their method, which integrates facilitated discussions, sharing of personal experiences, and practical training, has shown promising results in terms of social cohesion and increased disaster preparedness behaviors. This multifaceted approach recognizes that effective psychological support in emergencies goes beyond addressing immediate emotional needs and includes building practical resilience skills.

The importance of considering pre-, peri-, and post-disaster factors in the psychological impact on rescuers was emphasized by Brooks et al. (2016). Their research also highlighted the effectiveness of group psychological support in all phases of the emergency, underscoring the importance of a continuous and adaptable approach to psychological support in crisis situations. This longitudinal perspective on psychological support is crucial, as it acknowledges that the mental health impacts of emergencies can evolve over time and require ongoing, flexible interventions.

The collective findings from these studies point toward a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of psychological support in emergencies. They suggest a move away from a one-size-fits-all approach toward more tailored, community-oriented, and phase-specific interventions. This evolution in thinking recognizes that psychological support should be an integral part of all stages of emergency management, from preparedness through to long-term recovery.

Moreover, these methodologies highlight the interconnectedness of individual and collective psychological well-being in crisis situations. They suggest that effective psychological support should aim to strengthen both individual coping mechanisms and community resilience. This dual focus could potentially lead to more sustainable outcomes, as it addresses both immediate psychological needs and builds long-term community capacity to handle future crises.

The emphasis on practical skills training alongside emotional support, as seen in the Haiti study, also represents an important development. It recognizes that psychological well-being in emergencies is closely tied to an individual’s sense of agency and ability to take concrete actions. This approach could potentially reduce feelings of helplessness often associated with traumatic events and empower individuals to play an active role in their own recovery and that of their communities.

In conclusion, these methodologies for psychological support and assistance reflect a growing recognition of the complex, multifaceted nature of mental health in emergency situations. They point toward more holistic, community-oriented, and empowering approaches that have the potential to significantly improve both immediate response and long-term recovery outcomes.

The resilience of doctors in mass emergency situations and the risk of PTSD development in a minority of operators were examined by Guldner et al. (2023). Their study revealed that while most doctors manage to handle traumatized patients without experiencing significant trauma, a minority may develop PTSD symptoms, highlighting the need for a differentiated approach to psychological support. This research underscores the importance of recognizing healthcare providers not just as caregivers but also as potential victims of secondary trauma, necessitating tailored support systems within healthcare institutions.

The crucial importance of social support in preventing PTSD, anxiety, and depression among civilians affected by terrorist attacks was confirmed by Vincent et al. (2023). Their results suggest that post-disaster interventions should focus not only on clinical treatment but also on strengthening social support networks. This finding highlights the need for a more holistic approach to mental health in emergency situations, one that considers the social ecology of trauma and recovery.

Specific risk factors for PTSD development among healthcare workers were addressed by Schenk et al. (2017) in the context of the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. Their proposal to integrate these factors into rescue programs represents a step forward toward more targeted and personalized interventions. This research points to the potential of predictive models in emergency mental health, which could allow for more proactive and preventive approaches to psychological support.

Post-traumatic growth (PTG) and factors associated with it, such as spiritual support and being healthcare workers, were explored by Feingold et al. (2022) and Liu et al. (2024). These studies have opened new perspectives on positive psychological responses to emergencies, suggesting that emergency response should consider not only the prevention of psychological disorders but also the promotion of personal growth. This shift toward a more positive psychology framework in emergency situations represents a significant evolution in the field, moving beyond a deficit model to one that recognizes the potential for positive transformation through adversity.

The debate on the effectiveness of Psychological First Aid (PFA) remains open. While some studies support its effectiveness (Giarratano et al., 2019; Alto et al., 2021), others raise doubts about its preventive function and the methodological rigor of evaluations (Figueroa et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2021). This controversy highlights the need for further research and more rigorous evaluation of psychological interventions in emergency situations (Iudici et al., 2022). It also underscores the challenges of conducting robust research in contexts and the importance of developing more sophisticated methodologies for assessing the impact of psychological interventions in real-world emergency situations.

The collective findings from these studies point toward a more nuanced and personalized approach to clinical diagnosis and intervention in emergency situations. They suggest a move away from one-size-fits-all approaches toward more targeted, context-specific interventions that consider individual differences, social factors, and the potential for both negative and positive outcomes.

Moreover, these methodologies highlight the importance of longitudinal studies in understanding the long-term impacts of emergencies on mental health. They suggest that clinical approaches should be flexible and adaptable, capable of addressing both immediate trauma responses and long-term psychological trajectories, including the possibility of post-traumatic growth.

The emerging focus on resilience and growth, alongside the traditional emphasis on diagnosing and treating psychopathology, represents a significant shift in the field of emergency mental health. This dual focus could potentially lead to more comprehensive and effective interventions that not only mitigate negative outcomes but also foster positive adaptation and personal development in the face of adversity.

The need for an integrated approach to post-disaster psychosocial support and the importance of a structured network of coordination between professionals, volunteers, and authorities were highlighted by Dückers et al. (2017, 2018). Their research emphasized that interdisciplinary collaboration is fundamental for an effective response to emergencies. This work underscores the complexity of emergency response systems and the need for well-coordinated, multi-stakeholder approaches that can effectively mobilize diverse resources and expertise.

A mental health crisis intervention system based on integrated teams and unified management was proposed by Xi et al. (2019) in the Chinese context. This approach reflects a global trend toward greater integration of mental health services in emergency responses. It highlights the growing recognition of mental health as a critical component of comprehensive emergency management, rather than an afterthought or separate concern.

The integration of psychology into emergency medicine was advocated by Landa-Ramírez and Murillo-Cruz (2019). Their work highlights how the psychological dimension is essential in patient care in emergency situations, on par with more traditional medical considerations. This perspective challenges the historical separation between physical and mental health care in emergency settings and points toward a more holistic, patient-centered approach to emergency medicine.

A paradigm shift toward a community-based approach, combining clinical management of PTSD, access to interpersonal resources, and family support, was identified by Thoburn et al. (2014). Their proposal represents a more holistic and integrated approach to mental health in emergencies, highlighting a shift from a clinical-pathological approach to a community-based one. This shift recognizes the importance of social and community factors in mental health outcomes and suggests that effective interventions must engage with broader social systems, not just individual patients.

The collective findings from these studies point toward a more comprehensive and integrated approach to building networks among local services in emergency situations. They suggest a move away from siloed, discipline-specific responses toward more collaborative, interdisciplinary approaches that can address the complex, multifaceted nature of emergencies.

Moreover, these methodologies highlight the importance of local context and community engagement in emergency response. They suggest that effective network-building should not only focus on formal institutions and professional services but also incorporate local knowledge, community resources, and informal support systems.

The emphasis on unified management and integrated teams, as seen in the Chinese study, also represents an important development. It recognizes the need for clear leadership and coordination in complex emergency situations, while also acknowledging the diverse expertise required for effective response.

In conclusion, these methodologies for building networks among local services reflect a growing recognition of the interconnected nature of emergency response systems. They point toward more collaborative, community-oriented, and integrated approaches that have the potential to significantly improve both the efficiency and effectiveness of emergency response efforts. The challenge moving forward will be to implement these insights in diverse contexts, navigating local cultural, political, and institutional landscapes to create truly responsive and resilient emergency management systems (Table 2).

Finally, in evaluating the results obtained, some limitations are highlighted, which are useful for placing the interpretation of the results and considering possible alternatives for future research. The first limitation concerns the methods and data collection. A time frame was used that was restricted to the last ten years and only articles written in English. A proposal for future research could be to extend the research to include foreign language studies. A second limitation concerns the interpretation and discussion of the results, which is closely linked to the use of keywords in the article search and their selection. It is anticipated that by including alternative keywords (for example, more focused on the interventionist aspect of emergency psychology), studies could have been collected that might show other types of interventions. This last point leads to a third limitation regarding the clustering process: it is anticipated that with a broader number of articles, more focused on the intervention aspect of the discipline (through an expansion of the keywords), different clusters could have been identified, from which other elements could have emerged for discussion of the results.