Dealing With Adverse Events: A Meta-analysis on Second Victims' Coping Strategies
- PMID: 32168267
- DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000661
Dealing With Adverse Events: A Meta-analysis on Second Victims' Coping Strategies
Abstract
Objectives: Despite the critical need to understand the diverse responses by second victims to adverse events, there has not been a meta-analysis examining coping by second victims. We aimed to analyze the coping strategies applied by second victims in the aftermath of adverse events.
Methods: We performed a systematic search of nine electronic databases up to October 2018 and screened additional sources, such as gray databases. Two independent reviewers conducted the search, selection process, quality appraisal, data extraction, and synthesis. In case of dissent, a third reviewer was involved to reach consensus. Quantitative studies of the frequency with which coping strategies were applied by second victims were eligible for inclusion. We calculated the overall frequency of coping strategies and I statistic using random effects modeling.
Results: Of 10,705 records retrieved, 111 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 14 studies eventually included. The five most frequent coping strategies were Changing work attitude (89%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 80-94), Following policies and guidelines more accurately and closely (89%, 95% CI = 54-98), Paying more attention to detail (89%, 95% CI = 78-94) (task oriented), Problem-solving/concrete action plan (77%, 95% CI = 59-89) (task oriented), and Criticizing or lecturing oneself (74%, 95% CI = 47-90) (emotion oriented).
Conclusions: Second victims frequently used task- and emotion-oriented coping strategies and, to a lesser degree, avoidance-oriented strategies. To better support second victims and ensure patient safety, coping strategies should be evaluated considering the positive and negative effects on the clinician's personal and professional well-being, relationships with patients, and the quality and safety of healthcare.
References
-
- Gandhi TK, Kaplan GS, Leape L, et al. Transforming concepts in patient safety: a progress report. BMJ Qual Saf. 2018;27:1019–1026.
-
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Crossing the global quality chasm: Improving Health Care Worldwide. Consensus Study Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2018.
-
- Schwendimann R, Blatter C, Dhaini S, et al. The occurrence, types, consequences and preventability of in-hospital adverse events - a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18:521.
-
- Wu AW. Medical error: the second victim. The doctor who makes the mistake needs help too. BMJ. 2000;320:726–727.
-
- Clarkson MD, Haskell H, Hemmelgarn C, et al. Abandon the term “second victim.”. BMJ. 2019;364:l1233.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
