↓ Skip to main content

In the Aftermath

Overview of attention for article published in Anesthesia and analgesia, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
In the Aftermath
Published in
Anesthesia and analgesia, May 2016
DOI 10.1213/ane.0000000000001227
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gaylene C. Heard, Rowan D. Thomas, Penelope M. Sanderson

Abstract

Although most anesthesiologists will have 1 catastrophic perioperative event or more during their careers, there has been little research on their attitudes to assistive strategies after the event. There are wide-ranging emotional consequences for anesthesiologists involved in an unexpected intraoperative patient death, particularly if the anesthesiologist made an error. We used a between-groups survey study design to ask whether there are different attitudes to assistive strategies when a hypothetical patient death is caused by a drug error versus not caused by an error. First, we explored attitudes to generalized supportive strategies. Second, we examined our hypothesis that the presence of an error causing the hypothetical patient death would increase the perceived social stigma and self-stigma of help-seeking. Finally, we examined the strategies to assist help-seeking. An anonymous, mailed, self-administered survey was conducted with 1600 consultant anesthesiologists in Australia on the mailing list of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists. The participants were randomized into "error" versus "no-error" groups for the hypothetical scenario of patient death due to anaphylaxis. Nonparametric, descriptive, parametric, and inferential tests were used for data analysis. P' is used where P values were corrected for multiple comparisons. There was a usable response rate of 48.9%. When an error had caused the hypothetical patient death, participants were more likely to agree with 4 of the 5 statements about support, including need for time off (P' = 0.003), counseling (P' < 0.001), a formal strategy for assistance (P' < 0.001), and the anesthesiologist not performing further cases that day (P' = 0.047). There were no differences between groups in perceived self-stigma (P = 0.98) or social stigma (P = 0.15) of seeking counseling, whether or not an error had caused the hypothetical patient death. Finally, when an error had caused the patient death, participants were more likely to agree with 2 of the 5 statements about help-seeking, including the need for a formal, hospital-based process that provides information on where to obtain professional counseling (P' = 0.006) and the availability of after-hours counseling services (P' = 0.035). Our participants were more likely to agree with assistive strategies such as not performing further work that day, time off, counseling, formal support strategies, and availability of after-hours counseling services, when the hypothetical patient death from anaphylaxis was due to an error. The perceived stigma toward attending counseling was not affected by the presence or absence of an error as the cause of the patient death, disproving our hypothesis.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 24%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 14 24%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 29%
Psychology 10 17%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Philosophy 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 13 22%