Second Victims among German Emergency Medical Services Physicians (SeViD-III-Study)

Background: Patient care in the prehospital emergency setting is error-prone. Wu's publications on the second victim syndrome made very clear that medical errors may lead to severe emotional injury on the caregiver's part. So far, little is known about the extent of the problem within the field of prehospital emergency care. Our study aimed at identifying the prevalence of the Second Victim Phenomenon among Emergency Medical Services (EMS) physicians in Germany. Methods: Web-based distribution of the SeViD questionnaire among n = 12.000 members of the German Prehospital Emergency Physician Association (BAND) to assess general experience, symptoms and support strategies associated with the Second Victim Phenomenon. Results: In total, 401 participants fully completed the survey, 69.1% were male and the majority (91.2%) were board-certified in prehospital emergency medicine. The median length of experience in this field of medicine was 11 years. Out of 401 participants, 213 (53.1%) had experienced at least one second victim incident. Self-perceived time to full recovery was up to one month according to 57.7% (123) and more than one month to 31.0% (66) of the participants. A total of 11.3% (24) had not fully recovered by the time of the survey. Overall, 12-month prevalence was 13.7% (55/401). The COVID-19 pandemic had little effect on SVP prevalence within this specific sample. Conclusions: Our data indicate that the Second Victim Phenomenon is very frequent among prehospital emergency physicians in Germany. However, four out of ten caregivers affected did not seek or receive any assistance in coping with this stressful situation. One out of nine respondents had not yet fully recovered by the time of the survey. Effective support networks, e.g., easy access to psychological and legal counseling as well as the opportunity to discuss ethical issues, are urgently required in order to prevent employees from further harm, to keep healthcare professionals from leaving this field of medical care and to maintain a high level of system safety and well-being of subsequent patients.

Second Victims among German Emergency Medical Services Physicians (SeViD-III-Study).

BACKGROUND: Patient care in the prehospital emergency setting is error-prone. Wu's publications on the second victim syndrome made very clear that medical errors may lead to severe emotional injury on the caregiver's part. So far, little is known about the extent of the problem within the field of prehospital emergency care. Our study aimed at identifying the prevalence of the Second Victim Phenomenon among Emergency Medical Services (EMS) physicians in Germany. METHODS: Web-based distribution of the SeViD questionnaire among n = 12.000 members of the German Prehospital Emergency Physician Association (BAND) to assess general experience, symptoms and support strategies associated with the Second Victim Phenomenon. RESULTS: In total, 401 participants fully completed the survey, 69.1% were male and the majority (91.2%) were board-certified in prehospital emergency medicine. The median length of experience in this field of medicine was 11 years. Out of 401 participants, 213 (53.1%) had experienced at least one second victim incident. Self-perceived time to full recovery was up to one month according to 57.7% (123) and more than one month to 31.0% (66) of the participants. A total of 11.3% (24) had not fully recovered by the time of the survey. Overall, 12-month prevalence was 13.7% (55/401). The COVID-19 pandemic had little effect on SVP prevalence within this specific sample. CONCLUSIONS: Our data indicate that the Second Victim Phenomenon is very frequent among prehospital emergency physicians in Germany. However, four out of ten caregivers affected did not seek or receive any assistance in coping with this stressful situation. One out of nine respondents had not yet fully recovered by the time of the survey. Effective support networks, e.g., easy access to psychological and legal counseling as well as the opportunity to discuss ethical issues, are urgently required in order to prevent employees from further harm, to keep healthcare professionals from leaving this field of medical care and to maintain a high level of system safety and well-being of subsequent patients.

Strategies for the Psychological Support of the Healthcare Workforce during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The ERNST Study.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to the implementation of interventions to provide emotional and psychological support to healthcare workers in many countries. This ecological study aims to describe the strategies implemented in different countries to support healthcare professionals during the outbreak. Data were collected through an online survey about the measures to address the impact of the pandemic on the mental health of healthcare workers. Healthcare professionals, researchers, and academics were invited to respond to the survey. Fifty-six professionals from 35 countries contributed data to this study. Ten countries (28.6%) reported that they did not launch any national interventions. Both developed and developing countries launched similar initiatives. There was no relationship between the existence of any type of initiative in a country with the incidence, lethality, and mortality rates of the country due to COVID-19, and per capita income in 2020. The 24 h hotline for psychological support was the most frequent intervention. Tools for self-rescue by using apps or websites were extensively used, too. Other common interventions were the development of action protocols, availability of regular and updated information, implantation of distance learning systems, early detection of infection programs for professionals, economic reinforcements, hiring of staff reinforcement, and modification of leave and vacation dates.

Validation of the German Version of the Moral Injury Symptom and Support Scale for Health Professionals (G-MISS-HP) and Its Correlation to the Second Victim Phenomenon.

INTRODUCTION: Comparable to second victim phenomenon (SVP), moral injury (MI) affects health professionals (HP) working in stressful environments. Information on how MI and SVP intercorrelate and their part in a psychological trauma complex is limited. We tested and validated a German version of the Moral Injury Symptom and Support Scale for Health Professionals (G-MISS-HP) instrument, screening for MI and correlated it with the recently developed German version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (G-SVESTR) instrument, testing for SVP. METHODS: After translating Moral Injury Symptom and Support Scale for Health Professionals (MISS-HP), we conducted a cross-sectional online survey providing G-MISS-HP and G-SVEST-R to HP. Statistics included Pearson's interitem correlation, reliability analysis, principal axis factoring and principal components analysis with Promax rotation, confirmatory factor and ROC analyses. RESULTS: A total of 244 persons responded, of whom 156 completed the survey (33% nurses, 16% physicians, 9% geriatric nurses, 7.1% speech and language therapists). Interitem and corrected item-scale correlations did not measure for one item sufficiently. It was, therefore, excluded from further analyses. The nine-item score revealed good reliability (Guttman's lambda 2 = 0.80; Cronbach's alpha = 0.79). Factor validity was demonstrated, indicating that a three-factor model from the original study might better represent the data compared with our two-factor model. Positive correlations between G-MISS-HP and G-SVESTR subscales demonstrated convergent validity. ROC revealed sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 63% for G-MISS-HP using a nine-item scale with cutoff value of 28.5 points. Positive and negative predictive values were 62% and 69%, respectively. Subgroup analyses did not reveal any differences. CONCLUSION: G-MISS-HP with nine items is a valid and reliable testing instrument for moral injury. However, strong intercorrelations of MI and SVP indicate the need for further research on the distinction of these phenomena.

Second Victims in Intensive Care-Emotional Stress and Traumatization of Intensive Care Nurses in Western Austria after Adverse Events during the Treatment of Patients.

BACKGROUND: The second victim phenomenon is common among nurses in intensive care units. Apart from quantitative studies, little is known about individual cases among those high-risk groups. This study evaluates the natural history and cause of second victim traumatization in Western Austria for the first time to tailor specific intervention. METHODS: A total of 20 guided interviews were conducted with intensive care nurses in Western Austria. All interviews were transcribed and analyzed with MAXQDA software. Evaluation followed the structuring qualitative content analysis scheme according to Kuckartz. RESULTS: The most frequent symptoms of the second victim phenomenon reported were feelings of guilt and problems with falling asleep. Coping with the second victim phenomenon was accomplished by conversations in private as well as among work colleagues. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care nurses are exposed to many exceptional situations which have a high likelihood of resulting in second victim traumatization. As proximal psychosocial support is considered to be a main source of coping, wide-spread implementation of effective psychosocial peer support programs ought to be applied by medical organizations. Patient safety measures such as proactive and reactive clinical risk management (e.g., CIRS) should be linked to second victim support.

Birthing under the Condition of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: Interviews with Mothers, Partners, and Obstetric Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and the necessary containment measures challenge obstetric care. Support persons were excluded while protection measures burdened and disrupted the professionals' ability to care and communicate. The objective of this study was to explore the first-hand experience of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mothers, their partners, and obstetric professionals regarding birth and obstetric care in a university hospital. METHODS: To answer the descriptive research questions, we conducted a qualitative content analysis using a data triangulation approach. We carried out 35 semi-structured interviews with two stratified purposive samples. Sample one consisted of 25 mothers who had given birth during the pandemic and five partners. Sample two included 10 obstetric professionals whose insights complemented the research findings and contributed to data validation. Participants were recruited from the study sample of a larger project on patient safety from two German university hospitals from February to August 2021. The study was approved by two ethics committees and informed consent was obtained. RESULTS: Mothers complied with the rules, but felt socially isolated and insecure, especially before transfer to the delivery room. The staff equally reported burdens from their professional perspective: They tried to make up for the lack of partner and social contacts but could not live up to their usual professional standards. The exclusion of partners was seen critically, but necessary to contain the pandemic. The undisturbed time for bonding in the maternity ward was considered positive by both mothers and professionals. CONCLUSION: The negative effects of risk mitigation measures on childbirth are to be considered carefully when containment measures are applied.

Prevalence of Second Victims, Risk Factors, and Support Strategies among German Nurses (SeViD-II Survey).

BACKGROUND: Second victim phenomena (SVP) are critical to workplace and patient safety, and epidemiological data are limited to investigate the causes and impact on German health care. We investigated SVP in German nurses regarding prevalence, causes, and predisposition compared to a preceding study on German physicians (Second Victims in Deutschland/SeViD-I). METHODS: We conducted a nationwide anonymous cross-sectional online study in 2020 using a modified SeViD questionnaire including the BFI-10 (personality traits). Statistical analysis was conducted using chi² tests and binary logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 332 nurses, 60% reported to experience SVP at least once a working lifetime, with a 12-month prevalence among SVP of 49%. Of the nurses, 24% reported recovery times of more than 1 year. In contrast to physicians from SeViD-I, a main cause for becoming a second victim was aggressive behavior by patients. High neuroticism values, higher age, and medium work life experience, but neither gender nor workplace position, were predisposing for SVP. Like SeViD-I, nurses reported demand for an institutional response in cases of SVP. CONCLUSIONS: SVP is common among German nurses and comprises other causes and a different course than in physicians. Further research should concentrate on specific prevention strategies, e.g., profession- and workplace-based educational programs.

Mitigating the July effect

An editorial is presented on the mitigating the July effect. Topics include the arrival of a crop of newly graduated medical students beginning their internships, the influx of so many freshly trained physicians arriving at the same time always triggers concern, and the belief in a July effect with presumed adverse consequences for patient safety and quality of care.