Mapping the Second Victim Experience Among Western Nurses: A Scoping Review

Résumé fourni par la source

Background/Objectives: The second victim phenomenon is increasingly recognized as a significant issue affecting nurses involved in adverse events resulting from clinical decisions or interventions. Although patients and families, considered the first victims, are directly impacted, nurses often undergo challenges as second victims. With the growing awareness of these effects, this study aimed to map recent evidence on the second victim phenomenon among nurses in Western countries. Methodology: A Scoping Review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology in September 2024 and updated in November 2025. Eligibility criteria were defined using the PCC (Population, Concept, Context) framework. Searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, SciELO, and Scopus. Two independent reviewers carried out study selection, data extraction, and synthesis. Rayyan® supported screening, performed in two phases: title/abstract review and full-text analysis. Data extraction was conducted in Excel®, and data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and categorized into thematic areas. The review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines and was registered in the Open Science Framework. Results: Of the 111 articles retrieved, 39 met the inclusion criteria. Evidence shows that although several support programs exist for nurses as second victims, they are often perceived as inadequate or inconsistently implemented. Second victim experience is associated with physical (e.g., sleep disturbances), emotional (e.g., fear), and psychological (e.g., distress) symptoms, with consequences such as absenteeism, professional dissatisfaction, loss of meaning in life, and even suicide. Conclusion: Findings highlight the need for more comprehensive, accessible, and consistently implemented support strategies to meet the complex needs of nurses affected by the second victim phenomenon.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.