Finney, Robyn E.

Objectives This study identified the prevalence of second victim experience (SVE) in a multidisciplinary sample of healthcare learners and explored personal experiences of trauma and desired forms of support following traumatic patient care events or situations. Method We used the validated SVE Support Tool-Revised and the Physician Well-Being Index (PWBI) to query healthcare learners at a large academic health system across the institution's medical, graduate medical education, and health sciences schools. The survey was open to all healthcare learners from April 8th, 2022 to May 30th, 2022. Here, we report on an analysis of respondents’ fixed responses describing the prevalence and characteristics of SVE. Results Of 2298 potential respondents, 206 answered at least one question (9.0% response rate). Of the 206 respondents, 205 answered questions inquiring if they had been a part of a stressful or traumatic patient care event or situation and 54.1% (111/205) answered in the affirmative. Of this group, 49.5% (51/103) reported feeling like a second victim (SV). The average PWBI of the exposed group was significantly higher (worse well-being) than the nonexposed group (3.4 vs 2.6, P = .0009). The most common forms of desired support for those exposed to a traumatic event and felt like an SV was conversation with peers 95.3% (41/43), family 81.4% (35/43), and a supervisor or manager 67.4% (29/43). Conclusion Findings suggest that many healthcare learners experience SVE and would benefit from connection to desired support strategies. Strategies to mitigate the impact of SVE on professional self-efficacy should be considered by education administrators. We present strategies from the literature and our institution that may be replicated for early identification and support of learners with SVE.

AbstractBackgroundRecently the US Food and Drug Administration has granted variances to select blood centers to supply cold‐stored platelet components (CSP). In hemorrhage resuscitation warming of blood components with approved fluid warming devices is common.Study Design and MethodsPathogen‐reduced apheresis platelet units were collected and stored in one of two ways: (1) CSP‐I, (2) CSP‐D. CSP‐I were collected and immediately stored at 1–6°C until used. CSP‐D were collected and stored at 20–24°C for 5 days and transferred to storage at 1–6°C until use. Aggregometry using arachidonic acid (AA), adenosine diphosphate (ADP) and collagen as agonists was performed on the unit samples before and after the units were infused through a Ranger blood‐warming device.ResultsCSP‐I, 23 units, had very high aggregation responses to all agonists (all ≥47.6 ± 20.7). There was a statistically significant reduction in ADP‐induced aggregometry results from 55.1 ± 23.2 before compared to 33.5 ± 14.6 following infusion of the PLT through the blood warmer (p < .001). There were no differences in AA and collagen aggregometry results before and after the infusion of the platelets through the blood warmer. CSP‐D had 5 of the 15 units with visible clotting in the bag. The 10 CSP‐Ds studied had lower aggregation than all agonists before and after infusion through the blood‐warming device (all ≤49.9 ± 35.9).ConclusionWe detected a statistically significant reduction in ADP‐induced aggregometry in CSP‐I run through a Ranger blood‐warming device with no change with AA or collagen agonist aggregometry.

Objectives In 2018, the Healing Emotional Lives of Peers (HELP) Program was implemented at Mayo Clinic Rochester to guide healthcare professionals (HCPs) after a second victim experience, such as adverse patient events or medical errors. The HELP program was expanded to all HCPs in response to the anticipated stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic. This article aims to describe the rapid expansion of the peer support program and evaluate the effectiveness of peer support provided to affected colleagues (ACs). Methods Quantitative data collected from workshop evaluations, activations, and associated metrics (TPS Self-Assessment, Encounter Form, and AC Self-Assessment) were summarized through standard descriptive statistics using SAS version 9.4 software. Open-ended responses were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes about the HELP program and associated workshops. Results Between April 2020 and December 2021, 22 virtual workshops to train peer supporters were conducted with 827 attendees. Of these, 464 employees completed the workshop evaluation. A total of 94.2% rated the workshop as excellent or very good. Participants perceived the workshop to be highly effective and felt more prepared to support ACs. Between May 2020 and December 2021, 247 activations were submitted through the HELP Program’s intranet Web site and peer support was requested for 649 employees. Of the 268 TPS Self-Assessments, 226 (84.3%) felt that they provided helpful support to an AC. One hundred ACs evaluated support received, with 93% being “extremely” or “very satisfied.” Affected colleagues appreciated having a TPS provide judgment-free support. Conclusions The HELP Program promotes a culture of safety by helping HCPs process traumatic events. To effectively meet the needs of patients, healthcare organizations need to prioritize the well-being of their employees through interpersonal support.

There is growing recognition that clinical and nonclinical healthcare professionals may become “second victims” following adverse patient events, medical errors, or patient-related injuries. In addition to the trauma-associated symptoms experienced by second victims, unprocessed second victim experience (SVE) can lead to burnout and leaving the healthcare workforce. To better understand the risk factors and support needs of affected healthcare professionals after a SVE, we conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with twelve staff in obstetrics & gynecology and pediatrics at a large academic medical institution in the upper Midwest of the U.S. Several participants indicated that it was not the patient outcome itself that precipitated the SVE, but associated factors such as moral distress or communication challenges. Participants discussed the role of their work unit culture in post-SVE processing, expressing that units perceived as blame-seeking or where adverse events were not openly discussed, hindered their recovery. While desired support mechanisms were individualized, participants stressed the importance of immediate and proactive support, such as through a peer support program, and long-term support mechanisms for lingering symptoms. As attrition of the healthcare workforce continues to be a significant concern, it is essential that we understand and meet the post-SVE support needs of affected staff, to promote holistic care following adverse patient events.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory therapists (RTs) work alongside allied health staff, nurses, and physicians during stressful and traumatic events that can be associated with emotional and physiological implications known as second victim (SV) experiences (SVEs). This study aimed to evaluate SVEs of RTs, including both positive and negative implications. METHODS: RTs within a large academic health care organization across Minnesota, Wisconsin, Florida, and Arizona were asked to participate in an anonymous survey that included the validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool-Revised to assess SVEs as well as desired support services. RESULTS: Of the RTs invited to participate, 30.8% (171/555) completed the survey. Of the 171 survey respondents, 91.2% (156) reported that they had been part of a stressful or traumatic work-related event as an RT, student, or department support staff member. Emotional or physiologic implications experienced by respondents as SVs included anxiety 39.1% (61/156), reliving of the event 36.5% (57/156), sleeplessness 32.1% (50/156), and guilt 28.2% (44/156). Following a stressful clinical event, 14.8% (22/149) experienced psychological distress, 14.2% (21/148) experienced physical distress, 17.7% (26/147) indicated lack of institutional support, and 15.6% (23/147) indicated turnover intentions. Enhanced resilience and growth were reported by 9.5% (14/147). Clinical and non-clinical events were reported as possible triggers for SVEs. Nearly half of respondents 49.4% (77/156) indicated feeling like an SV due to events related to COVID-19. Peer support was the highest ranked form of desired support following an SVE by 57.7% (90/156). CONCLUSIONS: RTs are involved in stressful or traumatic clinical events, resulting in psychological/physical distress and turnover intentions. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on RTs’ SVEs, highlighting the importance of addressing the SV phenomenon among this population.