This article discusses the negative connotations that surround the term “second victim,” which is used to describe healthcare providers following their involvement in a adverse medical incident. Authors of this article persuade people to stop using this term, since it discourages healthcare providers from taking responsibility for their actions, as well as undermines the patient’s feelings and situation.

Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation describes what federally funded programs have accomplished in understanding medical errors and implementing programs to improve patient safety over the last five years. This compendium is sponsored jointly by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Department of Defense (DoD)-Health Affairs. The 140 articles in the 4-volume set cover a wide range of research paradigms, clinical settings, and patient populations. Where the research is complete, the findings are presented; where the research is still in process, the articles report on its progress. In addition to articles with a research and methodological focus, the compendium includes articles that address implementation issues or present useful tools and products that can be used to improve patient safety.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHQR) developed the CANDOR (Communication and Optimal Resolution) Event Checklist, which is a guide to be used by the CANDOR team after an adverse event occurred in the healthcare setting. The checklist includes effective ways of reporting, assessing, investigating, and analyzing the adverse event to decrease the likelihood of future incidents occurring, as well as improving the overall quality of patient care and safety.

The Communication and Optimal Resolution (CANDOR) process is used  by health care institutions and practitioners to respond in a timely, thorough, and just way when unexpected events cause patient harm. The CANDOR toolkit contains eight different modules, which contain PowerPoint slides with facilitator notes, tools, resources, or videos. Examples of modules include “Care for the Caregiver” and “Organizational Learning and Stability.” These modules focus on effective ways to reduce patient harm and increase overall healthcare quality and safety through family and patient engagement, as well as specific ways to decrease the risk of future adverse outcomes.

Background: The emotional impact of medical errors on patients may be long-lasting. Factors associated with prolonged emotional impacts are poorly understood.

Methods: The authors conducted a subanalysis of a 2017 survey (response rate 36.8% [2,536/6,891]) of US adults to assess emotional impact of medical error. Patients reporting a medical error were included if the error occurred ≥ 1 year prior. Duration of emotional impact was categorized into no/short-term impact (impact lasting < 1 month), prolonged impact (> 1 month), and especially prolonged impact (> 1 year). Based on their reported experience with communication about the error, patients’ experience was categorized as consistent with national disclosure guidelines, contrary to guidelines, mixed, or neither. Multinomial regression was used to examine associations between patient factors, event characteristics, and organizational communication with prolonged emotional impact (> 1 month, > 1 year).

Results: Of all survey respondents, 17.8% (451/2,536) reported an error occurring ≥ 1 year prior. Of these, 51.2% (231/451) reported prolonged/especially prolonged emotional impact (30.8% prolonged, 20.4% especially prolonged). Factors associated with prolonged emotional impact included female gender (adjusted odds ratio 2.1 [95% confidence interval 1.5–2.9]); low socioeconomic status (SES; 1.7 [1.1–2.7]); physical impact (7.3 [4.3–12.3]); no organizational disclosure and no patient/family error reporting (1.5 [1.03–2.3]); communication contrary to guidelines (4.0 [2.1–7.5]); and mixed communication (2.2 [1.3–3.7]). The same factors were significantly associated with especially prolonged emotional impact (female, 1.7 [1.2–2.5]; low SES, 2.2 [1.3–3.6]; physical impact, 6.8 [3.8–12.5]; no disclosure/reporting, 1.9 [1.2–3.2]; communication contrary to guidelines, 4.6 [2.2–9.4]; mixed communication, 2.1 [1.1–3.9]).

Conclusion: Prolonged emotional impact affected more than half of Americans self-reporting a medical error. Organizational failure to communicate according to disclosure guidelines after patient-perceived errors may exacerbate harm, particularly for patients at risk of health care disparities.

Resources for patients and families in need of information and support after a medical error or adverse medical event.

The Journal of Patient Safety and Risk Management published study of an “open” hospital system shows that a Collaboration Communication-and-Resolution Program (CRP) cut lawsuits by two-thirds and reduced legal expenses and the time needed to resolve claims. Due to this program’s success, physicians are encouraged to integrate CRPs into their health practices to increase overall patient health quality and safety.

University of Missouri Health Care (MUHC) deployed an evidence-based emotional support structure for second victims based on research with recovering second victims known as the forYOU Team. It was designed to increase awareness of the second victim phenomenon, “normalize” the psychological and physical impacts, provide real-time surveillance for possible second victims within clinical settings, and render immediate peer-to-peer emotional support when a potential second victim is identified. This article describes the forYOU Team experience.

The Collaborative for Accountability and Improvement Program is currently based at the University of Washington. The goal of the Collaborative is to bring together leading experts to support the growth and spread of Communication and Resolution Programs (CRPs), advocate on behalf of these programs with a shared voice, and exchange ideas. CRPs drive quality improvement, enhance patient safety, and facilitate patient-centered accountability. This CRP (Communication and Resolution Program) brochure describes CRP Core Commitments, Key Steps in the CRP Process and Launching a CRP.

In communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs), health systems and liability insurers encourage the disclosure of unanticipated care outcomes to affected patients and proactively seek resolutions, including offering an apology, an explanation, and, where appropriate, reimbursement or compensation. Anecdotal reports from the University of Michigan Health System and other early adopters of CRPs suggest that these programs can substantially reduce liability costs and improve patient safety. In this study, CRP participants were interviewed. They identified several factors that contributed to their programs’ success, including the presence of a strong institutional champion and investing in building and marketing the program to skeptical clinicians.

The Comprehensive Unit-based Safety Program (CUSP) was created by Johns Hopkins University patient safety researchers and brought to the public domain through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). CUSP aims to improve patient safety culture while providing front line caregivers with the tools and support that they need to tackle the hazards that threaten their patients. This program has been used to target a wide range of problems, such as patient falls, hospital-acquired infections, and medication administration errors.

The AHRQ toolkit includes training tools to make care safer by improving the foundation of how your physicians, nurses, and other clinical team members work together. It builds the capacity to address safety issues by combining clinical best practices and the science of safety.

Researchers reviewed patterns in healthcare policies and trends in five countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada) with histories of disclosing adverse incidents to patients. The researchers wanted to analyze the barriers that prevent healthcare providers and institutions from disclosing adverse events to their patients. They concluded that some barriers included difficulties with liability fees, patients’ beliefs on safety in the healthcare setting, and implementing policy changes on a large-scale. Effective ways to combat these challenges include carrying out a long-term program that involves educating patients and healthcare workers about safety.

Healthcare providers use root cause analysis to learn from malpractice and decrease the risk of adverse events. This method involves identifying the basic factors that cause performance variability. This model has three parts: 1) what occurred, 2) why did it occur, and 3) what strategies can be used to prevent the event from occurring in the future? This method is effective, because it helps healthcare providers identify the underlying causes of adverse events and take the necessary approaches to combat them.

Ernest Amory Codman MD (1869–1940) was a Boston surgeon who created a system in which he followed up with each of his patients years after hospitalization and recorded the end results of their care, including any errors in diagnoses and treatment. Dr. Codman then analyzed these errors and the correlation to patient health outcomes, and used them to make future improvements to not only increase patient safety but to excel as a healthcare provider.

The Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care and Patient Safety offers a detailed overview of ergonomics and and human factors, theories, methods, and models that are pertinent to patient care and safety. Specific topics included in this book include telemedicine, infection prevention, and anesthesia safety.

Two victims are involved in adverse incidents within health care. The first victim is the patient and family and the second is the health care provider. Researchers of this study focused on the effects of adverse events on healthcare professionals. They found that it is necessary to develop and implement support systems that can utilized by both patients, families, and healthcare providers when dealing with the effects of adverse incidents.

Communication-and-resolution programs (CRPs) in health care organizations seek to identify medical injuries promptly; ensure that they are disclosed to patients compassionately; pursue timely resolution through patient engagement, explanation, and, where appropriate, apology and compensation; and use lessons learned to improve patient safety. To make these programs more successful, legal entities should support them. State and federal policy makers should try to allay potential defendants’ fears of litigation, facilitate patient participation, and address the economic concerns of health care providers.

The existing structures and processes that together form an organization’s operating system need an additional element to address the challenges produced by mounting complexity and rapid change. The solution is a second operating system, devoted to the design and implementation of strategy, that uses an agile, network-like structure and a very different set of processes. The new operating system continually assesses the business, the industry, and the organization, and reacts with greater agility, speed, and creativity than the existing one. It complements rather than overburdens the traditional hierarchy, thus freeing the latter to do what it’s optimized to do. It actually makes enterprises easier to run and accelerates strategic change. This is not an “either or” idea. It’s “both and.” I’m proposing two systems that operate in concert.

The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety (2012) created a toolkit to help health care organizations implement support programs for clinicians suffering from the emotional impact of errors and adverse events. Based on the best available evidence related to the second victim experience, the toolkit consists of 10 modules, each with a series of specific action steps, references, and exemplars.

The human error problem can be viewed in two ways: the person approach and the system approach. Each has its model of error causation and each model gives rise to quite different philosophies of error management. Understanding these differences has important practical implications for coping with the ever-present risk of mishaps in clinical practice.

The response to adverse events can lack patient-centered-ness, perhaps because the involved institutions and other stakeholders misunderstand what patients and families go through after care breakdowns. A PFAC-designed simulation can help stakeholders understand patient and family experiences following adverse events and potentially improve their response to these events.

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI) and the National Patient Safety Foundation (NPSF) started collaborating together to utilize its combined resources and knowledge to further  patient safety efforts and create safety systems in various healthcare settings.

John P. Kotter is renowned for his work on leading organizational change. In 1995, when this article was first published, he had just completed a ten-year study of more than 100 companies that attempted such a transformation. Here he shares the results of his observations, outlining the eight largest errors that can doom these efforts and explaining the general lessons that encourage success.

In an era of calls for greater transparency in health care, disclosure is often cited as a practice necessary to physician ethics and patient safety. The University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) experience demonstrates that disclosure with offer can be conducted—in a setting similar to many other centers in the United States—without exacerbating liability costs. UW Medicine hope that this study will encourage further disclosure efforts, as well as the detailed evaluation of their effects.

The Massachusetts Alliance for Communication and Resolution following Medical Injury (MACRMI) created the Communication, Apology, and Resolution (CARe) Approach. This strategy aims to further patient safety by fostering honest communication, apologies, and just compensation in adverse situations. MACRMI partners with patient advocacy organizations to to teach health insurers and hospitals about this strategy.

The Collaborative for Accountability and Improvement and the Foundation for Healthcare Quality hosted a two-day retreat in Seattle, Washington (09/2017) in which administrators and healthcare providers discussed ways to advance communication and resolution programs (CRPs) and other resources in Northwest Hospitals to increase patient safety and communication among hospital leadership, attorneys, and health insurers.

The University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) systematically adopted the “open disclosure with offer” model, a principle-based strategy that emphasizes honesty and disclosure, to effectively respond to adverse patient outcomes and healthcare malpractices. When the UMHS adoped this model, there was a gradual reduction in litigation fees and the number of malpractice and patient harm claims.

The Oregon Patient Safety Commission (OCCRP) seeks to advance, support, and encourage patient safety through education, shared learning, and improved transparency in Oregon. It is a multi-faceted, semi-independent state agency created by the state legislature to further patient safety in the state. The OCCRP operates multiple mission-driven programs, which include the Patient Safety Reporting Program, Early Discussion and Resolution, and various quality improvement initiatives.

Alberta Health Services (AHS) adopted the Patient and Family Centered Care (PFCC) program to increase patient and family engagement in the healthcare settings. The PFCC encourages and trains patients, families, and healthcare workers to share their experiences and improve care. This program also offers methods to measure the effectiveness of this program.