Developing Core Indicators for Evaluating Second Victim Programs: An International Consensus Approach.

Objectives: To establish a consensus for evaluating second victims (SV) support interventions to facilitate comparison over time and across different organizations. Methods: A three-phase qualitative study was conducted from June 2023 to March 2024. This consensus approach engaged members of the European Researchers Network Working on Second Victims. A nominal group technique and insights from a scoping review were used to create a questionnaire for Delphi Rounds. Indicators were rated 1-5, aiming for agreement if over 70% of participants rated an indicator as feasible and sensitive with scores above 4, followed by a consensus conference. Results: From an initial set of 113 indicators, 59 were assessed online, with 35 advancing to the Delphi rounds. Two Delphi rounds were conducted, achieving response rates of over 60% and 80% respectively, resulting in consensus on 11 indicators for evaluating SV support programs. These indicators encompass awareness and activation, outcomes of SV support programs, as well as training offered by the institution. Conclusion: This study presents a scoreboard for designing and monitoring SV support programs, as well as measuring standardized outcomes in future research.

Application and Evaluation of a Multimodal Training on the Second Victim Phenomenon at the European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims Training School: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are often impacted by distressing situations during patient care and can experience the second victim phenomenon (SVP). Addressing an adequate response, training, and increasing awareness of the SVP can increase HCWs' well-being and ultimately improve the quality of care and patient safety. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe and evaluate a multimodal training organized by the European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims to increase knowledge and overall awareness of SVP and second victim programs. METHODS: We implemented a multimodal training program, following an iterative approach based on a continuous quality improvement process, to enhance the methodology and materials of the training program over the duration of 2 years. We conducted web-based surveys and group interviews to evaluate the scope and design of the training, self-directed learning materials, and face-to-face activities. RESULTS: Out of 42 accepted candidates, 38 (90%) participants attended the 2 editions of the Training School program. In the second edition, the level of participants' satisfaction increased, particularly when adjusting the allocated time for the case studies' discussion (P<.001). After the multimodal training, participants stated that they had a better awareness and understanding of the SVP, support interventions, and its impact on health care. The main strengths of this Training School were the interdisciplinary approach as well as the contact with multiple cultures, the diversity of learning materials, and the commitment of the trainers and organizing team. CONCLUSIONS: This multimodal training is suitable for different stakeholders of the health care community, including HCWs, clinical managers, patient safety and quality-of-care teams, academicians, researchers, and postgraduate students, regardless of their prior experience with SVP. Furthermore, this study represents a pioneering effort in elucidating the materials and methodology essential for extending this training approach to similar contexts.

How different countries respond to adverse events whilst patients' rights are protected.

Patient safety is high on the policy agenda internationally. Learning from safety incidents is a core component in achieving the important goal of increasing patient safety. This study explores the legal frameworks in the countries to promote reporting, disclosure, and supporting healthcare professionals (HCPs) involved in safety incidents. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to ascertain an overview of the legal frameworks at national level, as well as relevant policies. ERNST (The European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victims) group peer-reviewed data collected from countries was performed to validate information. Information from 27 countries was collected and analyzed, giving a response rate of 60%. A reporting system for patient safety incidents was in place in 85.2% (N = 23) of countries surveyed, though few (37%, N = 10) were focused on systems-learning. In about half of the countries (48.1%, N = 13) open disclosure depends on the initiative of HCPs. The tort liability system was common in most countries. No-fault compensation schemes and alternative forms of redress were less common. Support for HCPs involved in patient safety incidents was extremely limited, with just 11.1% (N = 3) of participating countries reporting that supports were available in all healthcare institutions. Despite progress in the patient safety movement worldwide, the findings suggest that there are considerable differences in the approach to the reporting and disclosure of patient safety incidents. Additionally, models of compensation vary limiting patients' access to redress. Finally, the results highlight the need for comprehensive support for HCPs involved in safety incidents.

Key factors for effective implementation of healthcare workers support interventions after patient safety incidents in health organisations: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to map and frame the main factors present in support interventions successfully implemented in health organisations in order to provide timely and adequate response to healthcare workers (HCWs) after patient safety incidents (PSIs). DESIGN: Scoping review guided by the six-stage approach proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and by PRISMA-ScR. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO, PubMed, SciELO Citation Index, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, reference lists of the eligible articles, websites and a consultation group. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Empirical studies (original articles) were prioritised. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool Version 2018 to conduct a quality assessment of the eligible studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: A total of 9766 records were retrieved (last update in November 2022). We assessed 156 articles for eligibility in the full-text screening. Of these, 29 earticles met the eligibility criteria. The articles were independently screened by two authors. In the case of disagreement, a third author was involved. The collected data were organised according to the Organisational factors, People, Environment, Recommendations from other Audies, Attributes of the support interventions. We used EndNote to import articles from the databases and Rayyan to support the screening of titles and abstracts. RESULTS: The existence of an organisational culture based on principles of trust and non-judgement, multidisciplinary action, leadership engagement and strong dissemination of the support programmes' were crucial factors for their effective implementation. Training should be provided for peer supporters and leaders to facilitate the response to HCWs' needs. Regular communication among the implementation team, allocation of protected time, funding and continuous monitoring are useful elements to the sustainability of the programmes. CONCLUSION: HCWs' well-being depends on an adequate implementation of a complex group of interrelated factors to support them after PSIs.

Key factors for effective implementation of healthcare worker support interventions after patient safety incidents in health organisations: a protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Health organisations should support healthcare workers who are physically and psychologically affected by patient safety incidents (second victims). There is a growing body of evidence which focuses on second victim support interventions. However, there is still limited research on the elements necessary to effectively implement and ensure the sustainability of these types of interventions. In this study, we propose to map and frame the key factors which underlie an effective implementation of healthcare worker support interventions in healthcare organisations when healthcare workers are physically and/or emotionally affected by patient safety incidents. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will be guided by the established methodological Arksey and O'Malley framework, Levac and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations. We will follow the JBI three-step process: (1) a preliminary search conducted on two databases; (2) the definition of clear inclusion criteria and the creation of a list of search terms to be used in the subsequent running of the search on a larger number of databases; and (3) additional searches (cross-checking/cross-referencing of reference lists of eligible studies, hand-searching in target journals relevant to the topic, conference proceedings, institutional/organisational websites and networks repositories). We will undertake a comprehensive search strategy in relevant bibliographic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINHAL, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, Epistemonikos, Scielo, Cochrane Library and Open Grey). We will use the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool V.2018 for quality assessment of the eligible studies. Our scoping review will be guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will not require ethical approval. Results of the scoping review will be published in a peer-review journal, and findings will be presented in scientific conferences as well as in international forums and other relevant dissemination channels. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 10.17605/OSF.IO/RQAT6.Preprint from medRxiv available: doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.25.22269846.

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.