You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Current Oncology
  • Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
  • Article
  • Open Access

1 December 2019

The Physician’s Achilles Heel—Surviving an Adverse Event

,
and
1
Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, 1331 29 Street NW, Calgary, AB T2N 4N2, Canada
2
Clinical Research Unit, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Abstract

Background: Of hospitalized patients in Canada, 7.5% experience an adverse event (AE). Physicians whose patients experience AES often become second victims of the incident. The present study is the first to evaluate how physicians in Canada cope with aes occurring in their patients. Methods: Survey participants included oncologists, surgeons, and trainees at the Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, AB. The surveys were administered through REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture, version 9.0: REDCap Consortium, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, U.S.A.). The Brief COPE (Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced) Inventory, the IES-R (Impact of Event Scale–Revised), the Causal Dimension Scale, and the Institutional Punitive Response scale were used to evaluate coping strategies, prevalence of post-traumatic stress, and institutional culture with respect to AES. Results: Of 51 responses used for the analysis, 30 (58.8%) came from surgeons and 21 (41.2%) came from medical specialists. On the IES-R, 54.9% of respondents scored 24 or higher, which has been correlated with clinically concerning post-traumatic stress. Individuals with a score of 24 or higher were more likely to report self-blame (p = 0.00026) and venting (p = 0.042). Physicians who perceive institutional support to be poor reported significant post-traumatic stress (p = 0.023). On multivariable logistic regression modelling, self-blame was associated with an IES-R score of 24 or higher (p = 0.0031). No significant differences in IES-R scores of 24 or higher were observed between surgeons and non-surgeons (p = 0.15). The implications of AES for physicians, patients, and the health care system are enormous. More than 50% of our respondents showed emotional pathology related to an AE. Higher levels of self-blame, venting, and perception of inadequate institutional support were factors predicting increased post-traumatic stress after a patient AE. Conclusions: Our study identifies a desperate need to establish effective institutional supports to help health care professionals recognize and deal with the emotional toll resulting from AES.
Keywords:
adverse events

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.