[Medical error in pathology: Qualitative study of the experience of 18 pathologists from the Hauts-de-France region]

The study aimed to investigate the experience of pathologists facing medical errors.

A qualitative study conducted with 18 pathologists in the Hauts-de-France region. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using grounded theory method.

Pathologists experienced three main stages after a diagnostic error: initial shock, re-mobilization, and enrichment. Most symptoms dissipated in the short term. Professional adjustments to prevent new errors were common. The term "second victim," referring to healthcare professionals affected by an error, was unfamiliar to participants. Most did not identify as "second victims," questioning the relevance of the term and emphasizing their responsibility in the error. To minimize errors, participants underlined the importance of communication, collaboration, and better working conditions. They called for ongoing training and improvement in managing medical errors, as well as increased recognition of the psychological impacts of such errors on healthcare professionals.

The results align with existing literature on other healthcare professionals. Currently, the term "second victim" is being questioned by some physicians and patient associations.

The study sheds light on pathologists' experience with medical errors, emphasizing the importance of prevention, communication, and support for affected healthcare professionals. Further quantitative research is needed to confirm these findings.