ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Losing a patient by suicide may lead to psychological distress and mid/long-term personal and professional consequences for psychiatrists, becoming second victims. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The validated Spanish version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST-E) questionnaire and a 30-item questionnaire created ad-hoc was administered online to psychiatrists from all over Spain to evaluate how patient suicide affects mental health professionals. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety-nine psychiatrists participated in the survey, and 256 completed the SVEST-E questionnaire. The results of the SVEST-E questionnaire revealed a negative impact of suicide on emotional and physical domains, although this seemed not to lead to work absenteeism. Most respondents desired peer support from a respected colleague and considered institutional support, although desirable, lacking. Almost 70% of surveyed stated that an employee assistance program providing free counseling to employees outside of work would be desirable. The ad-hoc questionnaire showed that up to 88% of respondents considered some suicides unavoidable, and 76% considered the suicide unexpected. Almost 60% of respondents reported no changes in the approach of patients with suicidal ideation/behavior, after losing a patient. However, up to 76% reported performing more detailed clinical evaluations and notes in the medical record. Up to 13% of respondents considered leaving or changing their job or advancing retirement after losing a patient by suicide. CONCLUSIONS: After a patient's suicide, psychiatrists often suffer the feelings of second victim, impacting personal and professional areas. The study results indicate the need for postvention strategies to mitigate the negative impact of patient suicide.
ABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Forensic Medicine/legislation & jurisprudence , Forensic Medicine/methods , Linguistics/legislation & jurisprudence , Linguistics/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , TranslatingABSTRACT
Introducción: las medidas coercitivas son un área de discusión entre profesionales de la salud mental. Su uso se entiende como inevitable en el manejo del paciente agudo con la finalidad de evitar daños a sí mismo o a otros. Sin embargo, deben usarse con precaución y únicamente como último recurso. La literatura sobre sus efectos perjudiciales es limitada, aún más respecto a las percepciones de los pacientes, siendo la Coercion Experience Scale (CES) pionera en la evaluación de la experiencia subjetiva de las medidas coercitivas. Método: proceso de adaptación lingüística y conceptual-traducción al español de la CES, mediante traducción-retrotraducción con escalas de equivalencia semántica y conceptual. Resultados: la versión final en español presenta una equivalencia tipo A (perfecta) o tipo B (satisfactoria) para todos sus ítems. Discusión/conclusiones: la versión adaptada presenta una buena paridad con la original, permitiendo la medición adecuada en muestras de habla española
Introduction: issues surrounding coercive measures are an area of concern among mental health clinicians. Their use tends to be seen as unavoidable in the acute patient management in order to prevent harm to the patient or others. They should be used with caution, and only as a last resort. The lack of scientific literature about the effects of coercive interventions is limited, especially regarding patient perceptions. The "Coercion Experience Scale" (CES) is pioneer in the evaluation of the subjective experience of coercive measures. Method: linguistic and conceptual adaptation process into Spanish of the CES, using translation-back-translation methodology, with semantic and conceptual equivalence rating. Results: all items of the final version received a type A (perfect) or B (satisfactory) equivalence assessment. Discussion/conclusions: the adapted version has good parity with the original version, guaranteeing proper measurement in samples of Spanish-speaking populations
