Second Victim Syndrome Among Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review of Interventions and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Second Victim Syndrome (SVS) refers to the significant emotional and psychological distress experienced by healthcare professionals following adverse patient events. While numerous interventions have been developed to support second victims, their effectiveness remains poorly understood. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the evidence on the outcomes of available interventions targeting SVS.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases, covering all records up to July 7, 2024. We included studies that evaluated the impact of SVS interventions on psychological, professional, and institutional outcomes. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework. Due to heterogeneity in study designs and outcome measures, we opted for a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, predominantly of moderate quality. Peer support programs were the most commonly implemented interventions, often structured around the Scott Three-Tiered Model. These programs demonstrated consistent short-term benefits, such as reduced emotional distress and perceived isolation. However, evidence for long-term outcomes-including professional resilience, burnout reduction, and retention-was mixed and generally of low certainty. Structured psychological interventions, including cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based programs, showed more promising long-term results but remain underexplored. Standardized outcome measures, such as the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST), were infrequently used, limiting comparability across studies.

CONCLUSION

SVS interventions, particularly peer support, offer short-term relief but limited long-term impact. There is a critical need for longitudinal research using standardized outcome measures to better evaluate effectiveness. This review highlights the need for system-wide, evidence-based interventions and standardized evaluation metrics to support healthcare professionals effectively.