Psychometric Properties of Korean Version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (K-SVEST)

Abstract

Objectives “Second victims” are defined as healthcare professionals whose wellness is influenced by adverse clinical events. The Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (SVEST) was used to measure the second-victim experience and quality of support resources. Although the reliability and validity of the original SVEST have been validated, those for the Korean tool have not been validated. The aim of the study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the SVEST. Methods The study included 305 clinical nurses as participants. The SVEST was translated into Korean via back translation. Content validity was assessed by seven experts, and test-retest reliability was evaluated by 30 clinicians. Internal consistency and construct validity were assessed via confirmatory factor analysis. The analyses were performed using SPSS 23.0 and STATA 13.0 software. Results The content validity index value demonstrated validity; item- and scale-level content validity index values were both 0.95. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency reliability were satisfactory: the intraclass consistent coefficient was 0.71, and Cronbach α values ranged from 0.59 to 0.87. The CFA showed a significantly good fit for an eight-factor structure (χ2 = 578.21, df = 303, comparative fit index = 0.92, Tucker-Lewis index = 0.90, root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). Conclusions The K-SVEST demonstrated good psychometric properties and adequate validity and reliability. The results showed that the Korean version of SVEST demonstrated the extent of second victimhood and support resources in Korean healthcare workers and could aid in the development of support programs and evaluation of their effectiveness.

Psychometric validation of the Chinese version of the Second Victim Experience and Support Tool (C‐SVEST)

“…Therefore, item N10, N15, N16 and N17 were added to the C‐SVEST scale. In this study, the Cronbach's α coefficients of colleague support were 0.713, which is higher than the findings which were 0.61 in the original version (Burlison et al, ), 0.63 in the Korean version (Kim et al, ), and 0.56 in the Argentina version (Brunelli et al, ), which showed similar results in institutional support.…”

“…Reliability and validity of the SVEST scale were reported in several countries (Brunelli, Estrada, & Celano, ; Burlison et al, ; Kim, Kim, Lee, Burlison, & Oh, ). However, it has not been tested in China.…”

“…All the item‐total correlation coefficients were above 0.2 except the one that had been deleted, which showed good discriminating ability. Moreover, The Cronbach's α coefficient of the total scale was 0.866 and that values of each dimensions were 0.713–0.896, indicating that the internal consistency of the C‐SVEST scale is higher than 0.61–0.89 in the original version (Burlison et al, ), 0.59–0.87 in the Korean version (Kim et al, ), and 0.805 in the Argentine version (Brunelli et al, ). Dimensions of colleague support and supervisor support were suggested to modify by original authors because of low Cronbach's α coefficients.…”

From organisational support to second victim‐related distress: Role of patient safety culture

“…The patient safety culture has a positive impact on organisational support, and both patient safety culture and organisational support have positive effect in reducing the second victim-related distresses.4 | D ISCUSS I ONPreventing health care providers from becoming the second victim post any adverse events is important since the second victim-related distress could further negatively affect patient safety and turnover intention(Kable et al, 2018;Wu & Steckelberg, 2012). The participants in the current study reported significantly higher percentage in physical and psychological distress and turnover intention compared with the study done in the United States(Burlison, Quillivan, Scott, Johnson, & Hoffman, 2016); however, those second victim-related distresses and their consequences are similar to the results reported by the nurses in Korea(Kim, Kim, Lee, Burlison, & Oh, 2018). The significantly higher distress and turnover intention rate might be associated with the absence of affirmative patient safety culture and organisation support.…”

“…The study findings showed that the RNs scored highest in psychological distress dimension (Table ); therefore, it is very important to assess their psychological status and, further, to assist them to decrease the distress. The researches have shown that support from managers and peers, especially in displays of affection and information, could effectively decrease psychological distress (Kim et al, ; Tamburri, ). Colleague support (1.1%, Table ) was very limited for the participants in the current study; however, the most needed support was a respected colleague with whom to discuss the incident.…”