Introduction. When complications arise in the delivery room, midwives and obstetricians operate at the interface of life and death, and in rare cases the infant or the mother suffers severe and possibly fatal injuries related to the birth. This descriptive study investigated the numbers and proportions of obstetricians and midwives involved in such traumatic childbirth and explored their experiences with guilt, blame, shame and existential concerns. Material and methods. A mixed methods study comprising a national survey of Danish obstetricians and midwives and a qualitative interview study with selected survey participants. Results. The response rate was 59% (1237/2098), of which 85% stated that they had been involved in a traumatic childbirth. We formed five categories during the comparative mixed methods analysis: the patient, clinical peers, official complaints, guilt, and existential considerations. Although blame from patients, peers or official authorities was feared (and sometimes experienced), the inner struggles with guilt and existential considerations were dominant. Feelings of guilt were reported by 36-49%, and 50% agreed that the traumatic childbirth had made them think more about the meaning of life. Sixty-five percent felt that they had become a better midwife or doctor due to the traumatic incident. Conclusions. The results of this large, exploratory study suggest that obstetricians and midwives struggle with issues of blame, guilt and existential concerns in the aftermath of a traumatic childbirth.

ObjectivesThe overall study aim was to synthesise understandings and experiences regarding the concept of spiritual care (SC). More specifically, to identify, organise and prioritise experiences with the way SC is conceived and practised by professionals in research and the clinic.DesignGroup concept mapping (GCM).SettingThe study was conducted within a university setting in Denmark.ParticipantsResearchers, students and clinicians working with SC on a daily basis in the clinic and/or through research participated in brainstorming (n=15), sorting (n=15), rating and validation (n=13).ResultsApplying GCM, ideas were identified, organised and prioritised online. A total of 192 unique ideas of SC were identified and organised into six clusters. The results were discussed and interpreted at a validation meeting. Based on input from the validation meeting a conceptual model was developed. The model highlights three overall themes: (1) ‘SC as an integral but overlooked aspect of healthcare’ containing the two clusters SC as a part of healthcare and perceived significance; (2) ‘delivering SC’ containing the three clusters quality in attitude and action, relationship and help and support, and finally (3) ‘the role of spirituality’ containing a single cluster.ConclusionBecause spirituality is predominantly seen as a fundamental aspect of each individual human being, particularly important during suffering, SC should be an integral aspect of healthcare, although it is challenging to handle. SC involves paying attention to patients’ values and beliefs, requires adequate skills and is realised in a relationship between healthcare professional and patient founded on trust and confidence.

Objective: Health-care professionals (HCPs) who are involved in an unanticipated adverse patient event, a medical error or a patient-related injury can become second victims. Being a second victim can lead to various symptoms, affecting the well-being of HCPs and possible turnover intentions or absenteeism. An increasing number of hospitals have implemented a second-victim support programme. To achieve unique insights into what works and what does not work in second-victim support programmes, HCPs’ perceptions are needed. The aim of this study was to translate the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) into Danish and test the psychometric properties of the Danish version (D-SVEST). Methods: The SVEST self-administered questionnaire was translated into Danish following the World Health Organization’s guidelines. Assessments of the content validity, construct validity and internal consistency were performed based on 171 participants. Results: The study demonstrated that the D-SVEST is content valid and fits the a priori defined structure. Yet, four items revealed unacceptable factor loadings (<0.4) and item-rest correlations <0.3. All Cronbach’s alpha estimates for these five dimensions exceeded 0.70. The dimensions on colleague and institutional support did not contribute to the validity. Conclusions: In conclusion, the D-SVEST is considered relevant and valid for measuring second-victim experiences and the adequacy of support resources. However, we recommend a modification of items 9 and 25 to enhance the measurement scale in a Danish context. The D-SVEST can be used by health-care management at Danish hospitals.

No abstract