Rapid Expansion of the Healing Emotional Lives of Peers Program During COVID-19: A Second Victim Peer Support Program for Healthcare Professionals.

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.

Cold platelet transfusion: The effects of a fluid warmer on platelet function.

BACKGROUND: Recently 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 METHODS: Pathogen-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. RESULTS: CSP-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). CONCLUSION: We 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.

Use of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) to Assess the Impact of a Departmental Peer Support Program on Anesthesia Professionals' Second Victim Experiences (SVEs) and Perceptions of Support Two Years After Implementation.

Anesthesia professionals experience events resulting in psychological and physiologic implications, known as second victim experiences (SVEs). This study evaluated the impact of a peer support program on anesthesia providers' SVEs. In July 2018, a departmental peer support program was implemented. All anesthesia professionals were invited to participate in a survey, including the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST), which evaluated SVEs and desired support, preimplementation of the program. The survey was repeated two years after program implementation. A total of 57.9% (348/601) completed the preimplementation survey; 37.6% (231/614) completed the postimplementation survey. The median SVEST scores for psychological distress (3.0 vs 2.8, P = .04) and institutional support (3.0 vs 2.3, P < .001) were significantly lower on the postimplementation survey, indicating more favorable responses. For both assessments, the most desired support option was a 'respected peer to discuss the details of what happened.' Postimplementation, 84.9% (191/225) agreed the program enhanced departmental support, 93.2% (207/222) agreed the program considered professionals' well-being, and 81.7% (183/224) agreed the program contributed to a culture of safety. A total of 99.1% (213/215) would recommend the peer support program to others. Implementation of a peer support program significantly influenced anesthesia professionals' SVE-related psychologic distress and perception of adequate institutional support.

Use of the Revised Second Victim Experience and Support Tool to Examine Second Victim Experiences of Respiratory Therapists.

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.

Peer Support and Second Victim Programs for Anesthesia Professionals Involved in Stressful or Traumatic Clinical Events.

Modern anesthetic care is very safe, but stressful and traumatic clinical events may occur. When they occur, anesthesia professionals are vulnerable to second victim experiences, resulting in significant and long-lasting psychological and emotional consequences if not addressed. Peer support can help anesthesia professionals cope with the negative effects of second victim experiences.

Understanding the Second Victim Experience Among Multidisciplinary Providers in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of second victim experience (SVE) among obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) clinical and nonclinical healthcare workers and compare healthcare workers who did and did not identify as a second victim (SV) in the last year. METHODS: The validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool and additional questions designed to explore SVE topics specific to OBGYN healthcare workers were administered to a multidisciplinary group. RESULTS: Of 571 individuals sent a survey link, 205 completed the survey: 117 worked in obstetrics (OB), 73 in gynecology (GYN), and 15 in both areas. Overall, 44.8% of respondents identified as an SV sometime during their career, 18.8% within the last 12 months. Among nonclinical staff respondents, 26.7% identified as an SV during their career and 13.3% in the last 12 months. Respondents who identified as an SV in the last 12 months reported experiencing significantly more psychological and physical distress, a greater degree to which colleague and institutional support were perceived as inadequate, decreased professional self-efficacy, and increased turnover intentions. The most common events identified as likely triggers for SVE were fetal or neonatal loss (72.7%) and maternal death (68.2%) in OB and patient accusations or complaints (69.3%) in GYN. CONCLUSIONS: Among survey respondents, there was a high prevalence of SVs in OBGYN staff, distributed equally between OB and GYN. Nonclinical healthcare workers also identified as SVs. The OBGYN departments should consider using the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool to screen for potential SV among their healthcare workers to provide additional support after events.

Evaluation of a Second Victim Peer Support Program on Perceptions of Second Victim Experiences and Supportive Resources in Pediatric Clinical Specialties Using the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST).

PURPOSE: Pediatric healthcare professionals (HCPs) may experience events that lead to psychological distress or second victim experiences (SVEs). This project evaluates the impact of a newly implemented peer support program on SVEs and perceptions of supportive resources among pediatric HCPs. DESIGN AND METHODS: A second victim (SV) peer support program was implemented in the pediatric inpatient and intensive care units in September 2019. Multidisciplinary HCPs in these units were invited to participate in an anonymous survey that included the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool before and one-year after implementation. The survey assessed HCPs' SVEs, desired support, and perceptions of the peer support program. RESULTS: 52.0% (194/373) completed the pre-implementation survey, and 43.9% (177/403) completed the post-implementation survey. At both timepoints, participants reported SV-related psychosocial distress, physical distress, or low professional self-efficacy; the most desired support was 'a respected peer to discuss the details of what happened'. Following implementation of the peer support program, HCPs were significantly more likely to have heard of the term 'second victim' (51.8 vs. 74.0%; p < 0.001) and to have felt like there were adequate resources to support SVs (35.8% vs. 89.1%; p < 0.001). In the post-implementation survey, most respondents indicated a likelihood to use the program for themselves (65.7%) or colleagues (84.6%) after involvement in future traumatic clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a peer support program significantly influenced awareness and perceptions of support available for SV-related distress. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Peer support programs should be implemented to help HCPs navigate SVEs and decrease SV-related turnover intentions.

Implementation of a Second Victim Peer Support Program in a Large Anesthesia Department.

The second victim phenomenon occurs when healthcare providers experience emotional or physical distress as a result of traumatic clinical events. Few hospitals have formalized peer support programs for second victims to navigate the postevent experience and offload associated emotional labor. This article describes the implementation of a second victim peer support program in a large academic anesthesiology practice, with the goal of augmenting emotional support for anesthesia providers. Program activations were tracked in a shared mailbox. Following peer support, second victims completed an evaluation assessing support received; trained peer supporters completed 2 evaluations assessing their comfort level and peer support encounters. From July 2018 to June 2020, ninety-one program activations (179 affected individuals) were made. A total of 130 peer support encounters were documented. Trained peer supporters were able to provide helpful support to affected colleagues nearly all (98.8%) of the time. Nearly 97% of second victims (25 of 31 evaluation respondents) reported the support as extremely or very beneficial, and 96.8% would recommend the program to colleagues. A second victim peer support program was successfully deployed in a large anesthesia department. This program was effective at a departmental level, fostering providers' well-being.

Second Victim Experience among OBGYN Trainees: What Is Their Desired Form of Support?

OBJECTIVES: Physician trainees in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) experience unexpected outcomes similar to those of supervising physicians. A relative lack of experience and perspective may make them more vulnerable to second victim experience (SVE), however. The objectives of our study were to contrast the prevalence of SVE between supervising physicians and trainees and to identify their preferred methods of support. METHODS: In 2019, the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool, a validated survey with supplemental questions, was administered to healthcare workers caring for OBGYN patients at a large academic center in the midwestern United States. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 571 healthcare workers working in OBGYN. A total of 205 healthcare workers completed the survey, including 18 (43.9% of 41) supervising physicians and 12 (48.0% of 25) resident/fellow physicians. The mean scores for the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool dimensions and outcomes were similar between the two groups. Seven (58.3%) trainees reported feeling like a second victim after an adverse patient safety event at some point in their work experience compared with 10 (55.6%) of the supervising physicians. Five (41.7%) trainees identified as a second victim in the previous 12 months compared with 3 (16.7%) supervising physicians (P = 0.21). The most common form of desired support for both groups was conversations with their peers. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees and supervising physicians are both at risk of SVE after an unexpected medical event and prefer conversations with peers as a desired form of support. Because trainees commonly encounter SVEs early in their careers, program directors should consider implementing a program for peer support after an unexpected event.

Second victim experiences of nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology: A Second Victim Experience and Support Tool Survey.

AIM (S): To investigate second victim experiences and supportive resources for nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology. BACKGROUND: Nurses are at risk of developing second victim experiences after exposure to work related events. METHODS: Nurses at a single institution were invited to participate in an anonymous survey that included the validated Second Victim Experience and Support Tool to assess symptoms related to second victim experiences and current and desired supportive resources. RESULTS: Of 310 nurses, 115 (37.1%) completed the survey; 74.8% had not heard of the term 'second victim'. Overall, 47.8% reported feeling like a second victim during their career and 19.1% over the previous 12 months. As a result of a second victim experience, 18.4% experienced psychological distress, 14.3% turnover intentions, 13.0% decreased professional self-efficacy, and 12.2% felt that institutional support was poor. Both clinical and non-clinical events were reported as possible triggers for second victim experiences. Peer support was the most desired form of support as reported by 95.5%. CONCLUSION(S): Nurses in obstetrics and gynaecology face clinical and non-clinical situations that lead to potential second victim experiences. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: The second victim experiences of nurses should be acknowledged, and resources should be implemented to navigate it. Educational opportunities and peer supportive interventions specific to second victim experiences should be encouraged.