Neglecting the “second victim” will not help harmed patients or improve patient safety

Clarkson and colleagues call for abandoning the term “second victim,”1 but its introduction was good for all parties.2 It may have increased the attention given to the phenomenon, but it should in no way minimise the tragedies of patients harmed by medical errors. Patient centred care is central to the mission of healthcare professionals, who are committed to helping patients—even more so when things go wrong. The wellbeing of healthcare professionals is crucial for a safe healthcare system and is central to patient care.3 Helping and caring for others can …

[1]  M. Clarkson,et al.  Abandon the term “second victim” , 2019, BMJ.

[2]  A. Wu,et al.  The Impact of Adverse Events on Clinicians: What's in a Name? , 2017, Journal of patient safety.

[3]  Jean E. Wallace,et al.  Burnout among doctors , 2017, British Medical Journal.

[4]  R. Dupont,et al.  Service provision to physicians with mental health and addiction problems , 2015, Current opinion in psychiatry.

[5]  F. Federico,et al.  Supporting clinicians after medical error , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  Matthew C Grissinger,et al.  Too many abandon the "second victims" of medical errors. , 2014, P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management.

[7]  Albert W. Wu,et al.  Medical error: the second victim , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.