Decisions and repercussions of second victim experiences for mothers in medicine (SAVE DR MoM)

Acute Stress in Health Workers in Colombia 2017-2021: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objectives: Analyze the presence of acute stress response after adverse events in human talent in Colombian health institutions from 2017 to 2021. Methods: Cross-sectional study of prevalence, carried out on 838 members of the human talent in health (professionals, technicians, technologists, and auxiliaries) of Colombian health institutions in the study period with the application of the EASE instrument. Univariate analysis using descriptive statistical techniques, chi-square and Student's t-test, and bivariate analysis with a Poisson regression model using the institucional SPSS v. 26. Results: The prevalence of adverse events in the last 5 years was 33.8%, presenting levels of acute stress qualifying as Medium-high emotional overload at 21.91%, while extreme acute stress was at 3.53%. The prevalence of risk for presenting acute stress after being involved in an adverse event was PR: 1.30 (CI: 1.24-1.36). Conclusion: Acute stress in human talent after adverse events is limiting health and care capacity and must be efficiently addressed by health institutions. Psychosocial risk is linked within the framework of the patient safety program and the institutional occupational health and safety management systems.

In search of an international multidimensional action plan for second victim support: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Insights around second victims (SV) and patient safety has been growing over time. An overview of the available evidence is lacking. This review aims to describe (i) the impact a patient safety incident can have and (ii) how healthcare professionals can be supported in the aftermath of a patient safety incident.

METHODS

A literature search in Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL was performed between 1 and 2010 and 26 November 2020 with studies on SV as inclusion criteria. To be included in this review the studies must include healthcare professionals involved in the aftermath of a patient safety incident.

RESULTS

In total 104 studies were included. SVs can suffer from both psychosocial (negative and positive), professional and physical reactions. Support can be provided at five levels. The first level is prevention (on individual and organizational level) referring to measures taken before a patient safety incident happens. The other four levels focus on providing support in the aftermath of a patient safety incident, such as self-care of individuals and/or team, support by peers and triage, structured support by an expert in the field (professional support) and structured clinical support.

CONCLUSION

The impact of a patient safety incident on healthcare professionals is broad and diverse. Support programs should be organized at five levels, starting with preventive actions followed by self-care, support by peers, structured professional support and clinical support. This multilevel approach can now be translated in different countries, networks and organizations based on their own culture, support history, structure and legal context. Next to this, they should also include the stage of recovery in which the healthcare professional is located in.

Validation and Psychometric Properties of the Spanish Version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool Questionnaire

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the validity and psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST-E) questionnaire.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study aimed at midwives and obstetricians in Spain. An online survey was conducted consisting of 2 parts: the first part collected different variables, and the second part collected the SVEST-E. The temporal stability of the instrument was evaluated using the test-retest method. For the construct validity and reliability, an exploratory factor analysis and a confirmatory factor analysis were performed using FACTOR program v.10 with a polychoric correlation matrix.

RESULTS

A total of 689 professionals participated in the study (323 obstetrician physicians/366 midwives). The mean (SD) score on the SVEST-E for the total sample was 3.09 (0.50). The parallel analysis of the exploratory factor analysis suggested a 5-factor solution, with a total explained variability of 61.8%. The goodness-of-fit indices of the model were the following: root mean square error of approximation = 0.038 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.031-0.042) and comparative fit index = 0.989 (95% CI, 0.988-0.992). The factor model obtained was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis, obtaining the values of root mean square error of approximation = 0.038 (95% CI, 0.026-0.053) and comparative fit index = 0.989 (95% CI, 0.969-1.000). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

The SVEST-E instrument maintains the same items as the original questionnaire but introduces changes in the organization of its dimensions. The Spanish version maintains adequate construct validity, reliability, and temporal stability, so it is a valid tool to evaluate the second victim experience in Spanish health professionals.

Multispecialty Physician Online Survey Reveals That Burnout Related to Adverse Event Involvement May Be Mitigated by Peer Support

OBJECTIVES

Involvement in adverse events can negatively impact physician well-being. Because burnout is increasingly recognized as a threat to patient safety, we examined the relationship between physician adverse event involvement and burnout as well as facilitators and barriers to support among physicians experiencing burnout.

METHODS

We surveyed physicians in the United States who are members of the networking platform, Doximity. We conducted quantitative and qualitative analyses investigating experiences with adverse events, the impact of adverse events, the type of support the physician sought and received after the event, and burnout.

RESULTS

Across specialties, involvement in an adverse event and burnout was common. Most respondents involved in an adverse event experienced emotional impact, but only a minority received support. Those reporting that the error resulted in emotional impact were more likely to experience burnout (adjusted odds ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.07); this association was mitigated by the most common form of support sought, peer support (adjusted odds ratio for burnout among those who received peer support versus those who did not, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.82). Barriers to support after an adverse event include punitive culture and systems factors such as administrative bureaucracy. Facilitators that emerged include peer, professional, and spiritual support, mentorship, helping others, the learning environment, and improved/flexible working hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians who experienced emotional repercussions from adverse events were more likely to report burnout compared with those who did not. Respondents proposed barriers and facilitators to support that have not been widely implemented. Peer support may help mitigate physician burnout related to adverse events.

Toward Constructive Change After Making a Medical Error: Recovery From Situations of Error Theory as a Psychosocial Model for Clinician Recovery

BACKGROUND

Making a medical error is a uniquely challenging psychosocial experience for clinicians. Feelings of personal responsibility, coupled with distress regarding potential or actual patient harm resulting from a mistake, create a dual burden. Over the past 20 years, experiential accounts of making an error have provided evidence of the associated distress and impacts. However, theory-based psychosocial support interventions to improve both individual outcomes for the involved clinicians and system-level outcomes, such as patient safety and workforce retention, are lacking. There is a need for evidence-based ways to both structure and evaluate interventions to decrease the distress of making a medical error and its impacts. Such interventions play a role within wider programs of health professional support. We sought to address this by developing a testable, psychosocial model of clinician recovery after error based on recent evidence.

METHODS

Systematic review methodology was used to identify studies published between January 2010 and June 2021 reporting experiences of direct involvement in medical errors and/or subsequent recovery. A narrative synthesis was produced from the resulting articles and used as the basis for a team-based qualitative approach to model building.

RESULTS

We identified 25 studies eligible for inclusion, reporting evidence primarily from experiences of doctors and nurses. The identified evidence indicates that coping approach, conversations (whether they occur and whether they are perceived to be helpful or unhelpful), and learning or development activities (helpful, unhelpful or absent) may influence the relationship between making an error and both individual clinician outcomes of emotional impact and resultant practice change. Our findings led to the development of the Recovery from Situations of Error Theory model, which provides a preliminary theoretical basis for intervention development and testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The Recovery from Situations of Error Theory model is the first testable psychosocial model of clinician recovery after making a medical error. Applying this model provides a basis to both structure and evaluate interventions to decrease the distress of making a medical error and its impacts and to support the replication of interventions that work across services and health systems toward constructive change. Such interventions may be embedded into the growing body of peer support and employee support programs internationally that address a diverse range of stressful workplace experiences.

Establishing a Guide for Developing Organizational Support in Healthcare Following a Critical or Sentinel Event

Health professionals require support and recognition to help manage the well-known impact of critical or sentinel events relating to patient care. The potential distress can be magnified or mitigated by the response of the organization and colleagues. However, strategies that are accessible, relevant, and effective in the aftermath of a poor outcome are not well established. Using an action research methodology, a support tool was collaboratively designed, developed, and evaluated in a maternity service of one organization and adapted to the mental health and addiction service in another. Four principles that are intrinsic to the establishment of support tools became apparent across the two settings. Through applying these criteria to the customization of the support tool, it became relevant within the new service setting, and an implementation guide for other organizations was created. Although undertaken pre-pandemic, insights derived from this study may benefit post-pandemic situations where the need for health professional support is even greater.

The Effect of Second-Victim-Related Distress and Support on Work-Related Outcomes in Tertiary Care Hospitals in Kelantan, Malaysia

After a patient safety incident, the involved healthcare providers may experience sustained second-victim distress and reduced professional efficacy, with subsequent negative work-related outcomes and the cultivation of resilience. This study aims to investigate the factors affecting negative work-related outcomes and resilience with a hypothetical triad of support as the mediators: colleague, supervisor, and institutional support. This cross-sectional study recruited 733 healthcare providers from three tertiary care hospitals in Kelantan, Malaysia. Three steps of hierarchical linear regression were developed for both outcomes (negative work-related outcomes and resilience). Four multiple mediator models of the support triad were analyzed. Second-victim distress, professional efficacy, and the support triad contributed significantly in all the regression models. Colleague support partially mediated the relationship defining the effects of professional efficacy on negative work-related outcomes and resilience, whereas colleague and supervisor support partially mediated the effects of second-victim distress on negative work-related outcomes. Similar results were found regarding resilience, with all support triads producing similar results. As mediators, the support triads ameliorated the effect of second-victim distress on negative work-related outcomes and resilience, suggesting an important role of having good support, especially after encountering patient safety incidents.

Experience and support of Chinese healthcare professionals as second victims of patient safety incidents: A cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

To describe the experience and support of Chinese healthcare professionals as second victims of PSIs.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study with anonymous online self-report questionnaires was adopted. A total of 1357 Chinese healthcare professionals participated in this study. The Chinese version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (C-SVEST) was used to evaluate the experience of second victims and the quality of support resources. Descriptive and inferential statistics were employed to analyze the data.

FINDINGS

This study showed that 350 participants (25.8%) had been involved in PSIs during their careers. The majority of respondents who had experienced PSIs agreed they suffered more from psychological distress, followed by professional self-efficacy distress, and physical distress. Besides, they regarded colleague support and management support as the most desirable support. Statistically significant differences were reported in some items. First, compared with medical staff without professional titles, staff with professional titles suffered more from psychological distress but gained more support from colleagues.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The second victim phenomenon deserves further attention. The programs focusing on training qualified colleagues to provide emotional support should be developed, implemented, and evaluated. Moreover, it is necessary to build a better patient safety culture with nonpunitive responses and encourage the disclosure and reporting of PSIs.

Translation and Validation of the Malay Revised Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (M-SVEST-R) among Healthcare Workers in Kelantan, Malaysia

“Second victims” are defined as healthcare professionals who are traumatized physically, psychologically, or emotionally as a result of encountering any patient safety incidents. The Revised Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST-R) is a crucial instrument acknowledged worldwide for the assessment of the second victim phenomenon in healthcare facilities. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Malay version of the SVEST-R. This was a cross-sectional study that recruited 350 healthcare professionals from a teaching hospital in Kelantan, Malaysia. After obtaining permission from the original author, the instrument underwent 10 steps of established translation process guidelines. Pretesting of 30 respondents was performed before embarking on the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to evaluate internal consistency and construct validity. The analysis was conducted using the R software environment. The final model agreed for 7 factors and 32 items per the CFA’s guidelines for good model fit. The internal consistency was determined using Raykov’s rho and showed good results, ranging from 0.77 to 0.93, with a total rho of 0.83. The M-SVEST-R demonstrated excellent psychometric properties and adequate validity and reliability. This instrument can be used by Malaysian healthcare organizations to assess second victim experiences among healthcare professionals and later accommodate their needs with the desired support programs.

Peer support programs in the fields of medicine and nursing: a systematic search and narrative review

Peer-provided services exist in many different domains and professions. However, there is a knowledge gap in the existing programs' descriptions and grouping that hinders creating new high-quality peer support programs. The objectives of this article are two-fold in describing existing peer support programs published in the literature in the medical field and evaluating their descriptive quality. Six electronic databases, grey literature, and reference lists were systematically searched. Studies reporting the existence of a support program delivered by peers and its description or methodology were included. Studies targeting patients and children were excluded. 11 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis and explored in detail. A total of 2155 peers participated in support programs in the fields of medicine, nursing, or both. Programs in other professional fields were not found. Programs were described in five different countries. Three methods of peer support delivery were found: in person, online, and mixed varying in their goals, duration, peer training supervision and participant demographics and number. Program descriptions were rated as good, fair, or poor using a verified rating scale. There are numerous well-described programs varying in their methodology and type of delivery. Thus, the emergence of new programs can be based on such models that have been well-described in the literature.

Second Victim Experience among OBGYN Trainees: What Is Their Desired Form of Support?

OBJECTIVES

Physician trainees in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) experience unexpected outcomes similar to those of supervising physicians. A relative lack of experience and perspective may make them more vulnerable to second victim experience (SVE), however. The objectives of our study were to contrast the prevalence of SVE between supervising physicians and trainees and to identify their preferred methods of support.

METHODS

In 2019, the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool, a validated survey with supplemental questions, was administered to healthcare workers caring for OBGYN patients at a large academic center in the midwestern United States.

RESULTS

The survey was sent to 571 healthcare workers working in OBGYN. A total of 205 healthcare workers completed the survey, including 18 (43.9% of 41) supervising physicians and 12 (48.0% of 25) resident/fellow physicians. The mean scores for the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool dimensions and outcomes were similar between the two groups. Seven (58.3%) trainees reported feeling like a second victim after an adverse patient safety event at some point in their work experience compared with 10 (55.6%) of the supervising physicians. Five (41.7%) trainees identified as a second victim in the previous 12 months compared with 3 (16.7%) supervising physicians (P = 0.21). The most common form of desired support for both groups was conversations with their peers.

CONCLUSIONS

Trainees and supervising physicians are both at risk of SVE after an unexpected medical event and prefer conversations with peers as a desired form of support. Because trainees commonly encounter SVEs early in their careers, program directors should consider implementing a program for peer support after an unexpected event.

The Intersection of Work and Home Challenges Faced by Physician Mothers During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Analysis

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has presented extreme challenges for health care workers. This study sought to characterize challenges faced by physician mothers, compare differences in challenges by home and work characteristics, and elicit specific needs and potential solutions. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods online survey of the Physician Moms Group (PMG) and PMG COVID19 Subgroup on Facebook from April 18th to 29th, 2020. We collected structured data on personal and professional characteristics and qualitative data on home and work concerns. We analyzed qualitative data thematically and used bivariate analyses to evaluate variation in themes by frontline status and children's ages. Results: We included 1,806 participants in analysis and identified 10 key themes. The most frequently identified need/solution was for Community and Government Support (n = 545, 47.1%). When comparing frontline and nonfrontline physicians, those on the frontline more frequently raised concerns about Personal Health and Safety (67.8% vs. 48.4%, p < 0.001), Organizational Communication and Relationships (31.8% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.001), and Family Health and Safety (27.2 vs. 16.6, p < 0.001), while nonfrontline physicians more frequently addressed Patient Care and Safety (56.4% vs. 48.2%, p < 0.001) and Financial/Job Security (33.8% vs. 46.9%, p < 0.001). Participants with an elementary school-aged child more frequently raised concerns about Parenting/Homeschooling (44.0% vs. 31.1%, p < 0.001) and Work/Life Balance (28.4 vs. 13.7, p < 0.001), and participants with a preschool-aged child more frequently addressed Access to Childcare (24.0 vs. 7.7, p < 0.001) and Spouse/Partner Relationships (15.8 vs. 9.5, p < 0.001), when compared to those without children in these age groups. Conclusions: The physician workforce is not homogenous. Health care and government leaders need to understand these diverse challenges in order to meet physicians' professional and family needs during the pandemic.

Blame and its consequences for healthcare professionals: response to Tigard

Tigard (2019) suggests that the medical community would benefit from continuing to promote notions of individual responsibility and blame in healthcare settings. In particular, he contends that blame will promote systematic improvement, both on the individual and institutional levels, by increasing the likelihood that the blameworthy party will 'own up' to his or her mistake and apologise. While we agree that communicating regret and offering a genuine apology are critical steps to take when addressing patient harm, the idea that medical professionals should continue to 'take the blame' for medical errors flies in the face of existing science and threatens to do more harm than good. We contrast Dr Tigard's approach with the current literature on blame to promote an alternative strategy that may help to create lasting change in the face of unfortunate error.

Understanding physician burnout

Physician well-being is associated with benefits for physicians, patients, and health care systems. Well-being encompasses many inter-related attributes, including but not limited to resilience, fulfillment, joy in work, and burnout. Among these, burnout has been studied most widely, and has been found to be more frequent among medical trainees and professionals than in the general population. Burnout has been associated with physician depression and suicidality, which are also more frequent among physicians than the general population. The negative effects of burnout include decreased patient satisfaction, increased medical errors, and increased costs. Physician burnout has been associated with both organization-level drivers that contribute to an imbalance between resources and workload for physicians, and individual-level drivers related to resilience practices and attitudes. This paper reviews the literature on the epidemiology, drivers, and implications of physician burnout.

Evidence Relating Health Care Provider Burnout and Quality of Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether health care provider burnout contributes to lower quality of patient care is unclear.

PURPOSE

To estimate the overall relationship between burnout and quality of care and to evaluate whether published studies provide exaggerated estimates of this relationship.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Health and Psychosocial Instruments (EBSCO), Mental Measurements Yearbook (EBSCO), EMBASE (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), with no language restrictions, from inception through 28 May 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Peer-reviewed publications, in any language, quantifying health care provider burnout in relation to quality of patient care.

DATA EXTRACTION

2 reviewers independently selected studies, extracted measures of association of burnout and quality of care, and assessed potential bias by using the Ioannidis (excess significance) and Egger (small-study effect) tests.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 11 703 citations were identified, from which 123 publications with 142 study populations encompassing 241 553 health care providers were selected. Quality-of-care outcomes were grouped into 5 categories: best practices (n = 14), communication (n = 5), medical errors (n = 32), patient outcomes (n = 17), and quality and safety (n = 74). Relations between burnout and quality of care were highly heterogeneous (I2 = 93.4% to 98.8%). Of 114 unique burnout-quality combinations, 58 indicated burnout related to poor-quality care, 6 indicated burnout related to high-quality care, and 50 showed no significant effect. Excess significance was apparent (73% of studies observed vs. 62% predicted to have statistically significant results; P = 0.011). This indicator of potential bias was most prominent for the least-rigorous quality measures of best practices and quality and safety.

LIMITATION

Studies were primarily observational; neither causality nor directionality could be determined.

CONCLUSION

Burnout in health care professionals frequently is associated with poor-quality care in the published literature. The true effect size may be smaller than reported. Future studies should prespecify outcomes to reduce the risk for exaggerated effect size estimates.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Stanford Maternal and Child Health Research Institute.

Duration of second victim symptoms in the aftermath of a patient safety incident and association with the level of patient harm: a cross-sectional study in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

To describe healthcare providers' symptoms evoked by patient safety incidents (PSIs), the duration of these symptoms and the association with the degree of patient harm caused by the incident.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

32 Dutch hospitals that participate in the 'Peer Support Collaborative'.

PARTICIPANTS

4369 healthcare providers (1619 doctors and 2750 nurses) involved in a PSI at any time during their career.

INTERVENTIONS

All doctors and nurses working in direct patient care in the 32 participating hospitals were invited via email to participate in an online survey.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of symptoms, symptom duration and its relationship with the degree of patient harm.

RESULTS

In total 4369 respondents were involved in a PSI and completely filled in the questionnaire. Of these, 462 reported having been involved in a PSI with permanent harm or death during the last 6 months. This had a personal, professional impact as well as impact on effective teamwork requirements. The impact of a PSI increased when the degree of patient harm was more severe. The most common symptom was hypervigilance (53.0%). The three most common symptoms related to teamwork were having doubts about knowledge and skill (27.0%), feeling unable to provide quality care (15.6%) and feeling uncomfortable within the team (15.5%). PSI with permanent harm or death was related to eightfold higher likelihood of provider-related symptoms lasting for more than 1 month and ninefold lasting longer than 6 months compared with symptoms reported when the PSI caused no harm.

CONCLUSION

The impact of PSI remains an underestimated problem. The higher the degree of harm, the longer the symptoms last. Future studies should evaluate how these data can be integrated in evidence-based support systems.

Second victims in health care: current perspectives

Medical errors are a serious public health problem and the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer. Every day, the health care professionals (HCPs) practice their skill and knowledge within excessively complex situations and meet unexpected patient outcomes. These unexpected complications and unintentional errors will always be a part of the medical system due to the universal nature of human fallibility and technology. While not all errors are life-threatening, they can significantly compromise a patient's quality of life. However, the victims of medical error reach far beyond the patient. The second victim (SV), which defined for the first time by Albert Wu in his description of the impact of errors on HCPs by both personally and professionally, is a medical emergency equivalent to post-traumatic stress disorder. When the errors occur, it causes a domino effect including the four groups: the patient and family (first victim), the HCP [SV], the hospital reputation (third victim), and patients who are harmed subsequently (fourth victims). The rights of our patients to safe, reliable, and patient-centered care are critical and most important as a primary and utmost aim of medicine. However, we also have to take care of our own (SVs), especially when we have good people who mean to do well and then find themselves in an emotionally complex situation. There is a need to articulate to the public, politicians, and media how system failure leads to medical error even in hand of well-educated and competent HCPs are given an increasing clinical workload. Furthermore, despite several leading institutions in western countries have developed formal support programs that allow HCPs to cope with their emotional distress by obtaining timely support in an emphatic, confidential, non-judgmental environment, we need to raise awareness of this phenomenon and appropriate institutional responses both to harmed patients and their families and HCPs.