In the Aftermath: Attitudes of Anesthesiologists to Supportive Strategies after an Unexpected Intraoperative Patient Death

Abstract

Background: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.