Ethical issues in research with second victims: A scoping review
BackgroundSecond victim is the name given to the healthcare personnel—most often a nursing professional—involved with the error that led to the adverse event to a patient and who, as a result, have experienced negative psychological effects. Research with second victims has increased over the years,...
| Authors: | ; ; ; |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 电子 文件 |
| 语言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| 出版: |
2024
|
| In: |
Nursing ethics
Year: 2024, 卷: 31, 发布: 8, Pages: 1413-1427 |
| Further subjects: | B
scientific misconduct
B ethics research B patient safety B second victim B Health Personnel B adverse event |
| 在线阅读: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 总结: | BackgroundSecond victim is the name given to the healthcare personnel—most often a nursing professional—involved with the error that led to the adverse event to a patient and who, as a result, have experienced negative psychological effects. Research with second victims has increased over the years, however concerns exist with regards to the ethical risks imposed upon these individuals.AimTo explore the extent to which research with second victims of adverse events in healthcare settings adhere to ethical requirements.MethodsA scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework and using the following databases: PUBMED, Web of Science, and SCOPUS. Original research of any study design focused on second victims and published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese in 2014–2023 were included. A critical narrative approach was used to discuss the findings.Ethical considerationsThe review followed ethical guidelines emphasizing accurate authorship attribution and truthful data reporting.ResultsFifteen studies using qualitative (n = 2), quantitative (n = 10), and mixed-method (n = 3) designs were included. Over half were not assessed by a research ethics committee, with questionable reasons given by the authors. One-third did not refer to having used an informed consent. In two studies, participants were recruited by their workplace superiors, which could potentially right to autonomy and voluntary participation.ConclusionOver half of the included studies with second victims did not comply with fundamental ethical aspects, with risk to inflict respect for individual autonomy, confidentiality, and of not causing any harm to participants.Implications for nursing researchHealthcare personnel involved in adverse events are most often nursing professionals; therefore, any breach of ethics in research with this population is likely to directly affect their rights as research participants. We provide recommendations to promote better research practices with second victims towards safeguarding their rights as research participants. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1477-0989 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Nursing ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/09697330241238345 |
