SynthesisBMJ open2025
Avoiding 'second victims' in healthcare: what support do staff want for coping with patient safety incidents, what do they get and is it effective? A systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of patient safety incident reporting practices in maternity care.BMJ open quality · 2025Pooled it
- Obstetric sonographers' second victim experiences following diagnostic error: implications for wellbeing, support and patient safety.Ultrasound (Leeds, England) · 2026Article
- Leadership and Organizational Responses After Patient Safety Incidents: A Systematic Review of Second-Victim Outcomes and Evidence Gaps in Safety Behaviors.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- How Nurses Maintain High-Risk Medication Safety in Paediatric Intensive Care.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- The impact of patient death and suicide on mental health professionals: mixed-methods study.BJPsych open · 2026Article
- Preventive Support Strategies for the Second Victim Phenomenon in Nurses: A Mixed-Method Study.International nursing review · 2026Article
- Patient Safety Culture, Second Victim Experience, and Post-Traumatic Growth Among Hospital Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing open · 2026Article
- Uncovering unmet needs in healthcare teams: a cross-sectional study on the second victim phenomenon.Israel journal of health policy research · 2026Article
- "Talking to Someone Who Gets It…" Experiences of Surgical Site Teams in Implementing a Peer Support Programme for Surgeons After Adverse Events.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Enhancing nurses' self-efficacy in peer support for second victims through simulation training: a randomised controlled trial.BMC nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIncontrovertible evidence surrounds the need to support healthcare professionals after patient safety incidents (PSIs). However, what characterises effective organisational support is less clearly understood and defined. This review aims to determine what support healthcare professionals want for coping with PSIs, what support interventions/approaches are currently available and which have evidence for effectiveness.
designSystematic research review with narrative synthesis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Scopus, PubMed and Web of Science databases (from 2010 to mid-2021; updated December 2022), reference lists of eligible articles and Connected Papers software. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Empirical studies (1) containing information about support frontline healthcare staff want before/after a PSI, OR addressing (2) support currently available, OR (3) the effectiveness of support to help prevent/alleviate consequences of a PSI. Study quality was appraised using the Quality Assessment for Diverse Studies tool.
resultsNinety-nine studies were identified. Staff most wanted: peer support (n=28), practical support and guidance (n=27) and professional mental health support (n=21). They mostly received: peer support (n=46), managerial support (n=23) and some form of debrief (n=15). Reports of poor PSI support were common. Eleven studies examined intervention effectiveness. Evidence was positive for the effectiveness of preventive/preparatory interventions (n=3), but mixed for peer support programmes designed to alleviate harmful consequences after PSIs (n=8). Study quality varied.
conclusionsBeyond peer support, organisational support for PSIs appears to be misaligned with staff desires. Gaps exist in providing preparatory/preventive interventions and practical support and guidance. Reliable effectiveness data are lacking. Very few studies incorporated comparison groups or randomisation; most used self-report measures. Despite inconclusive evidence, formal peer support programmes dominate. This review illustrates a critical need to fund robust PSI-related intervention effectiveness studies to provide organisations with the evidence they need to make informed decisions when building PSI support programmes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022325796.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.