Validation and use of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool questionnaire: a scoping review

Y J Dato Md Yusof; Q X Ng; S E Teoh; C Y L Loh; X Xin; J Thumboo

doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2023.08.003

Validation and use of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool questionnaire: a scoping review

Public Health. 2023 Oct:223:183-192. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2023.08.003. Epub 2023 Sep 4.

Authors

Y J Dato Md Yusof¹, Q X Ng², S E Teoh³, C Y L Loh³, X Xin¹, J Thumboo⁴

Affiliations

¹ Health Services Research Unit, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.
² Health Services Research Unit, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore. Electronic address: ng.qin.xiang@u.nus.edu.
³ NUS Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
⁴ Health Services Research Unit, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; SingHealth Duke-NUS Medicine Academic Clinical Programme, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore.

PMID: 37672831
DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2023.08.003

Abstract

Objectives: Patient safety incidents can impact not only patients and families but also healthcare providers, who may experience negative emotions and symptoms, such as anxiety, guilt, stress, and loss of confidence. To identify and support these "second victims," a screening tool called the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) has been developed. This scoping review aims to map our current knowledge of the SVEST in terms of its scope of use, validation and limitations.

Study design: Scoping review.

Methods: In accordance with the framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews, we conducted a literature search in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, Embase and PsycINFO databases from database inception up till 1 March 2023.

Results: A total of 31 studies were reviewed. The SVEST has been cross-culturally adapted from English into other languages. The SVEST has been successfully used in different contexts and with various healthcare professionals, including doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, midwives and pharmacists. The tool has been used to assess the impact of second victim experiences and the effectiveness of support interventions in addressing the phenomenon. Validity assessment of translated versions of SVEST in the reviewed studies revealed good content validity in most cases, although some studies did not report clear values for scale-level Content Validity Index. On the whole, SVEST is generally a reliable and valid tool, although further refinements and modifications may improve its validity and reliability.

Conclusions: The review highlights the significance of SVEST as a crucial resource for healthcare providers and organisations that prioritise well-being and safety in health care. It also underscores the importance of recognising the needs of second victims and offering them appropriate interventions to manage the aftermath of adverse events.

Keywords: Medical errors; SVEST; Scoping review; Second Victim Experience and Support Tool; Second victim.

Publication types

Systematic Review
Review

MeSH terms

Anxiety Disorders
Anxiety*
Databases, Factual
Health Personnel*
Humans
Reproducibility of Results