CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchStress and Burnout ResearchOccupational Health and Burnout

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

What makes an incident critical for ambulance workers? Emotional outcomes and implications for intervention

Halpern, Janice, Gurevich, Maria, Schwartz, Brian, Brazeau, Paulette·2009·Work & Stress
DOI 10.1080/02678370903057317
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Ambulance workers use the term “critical incident” to refer to a category of workplace stressor. Developing an evidence-based approach to critical incident stress begins with identifying what makes incidents critical. The aim of this qualitative study was to characterize critical incidents as well as elicit suggestions for interventions. We interviewed 60 ambulance-based workers, both front-line and supervisors, and analysed interview transcripts. Having presented their suggestions for interventions more fully elsewhere (Halpern et al, 2009), here we characterize the incidents that emerged as critical and the emotional responses evoked by them. We found they suffered considerable distress from critical incidents and would welcome interventions. Incidents that were identified as critical commonly involved patient death, often combined with poignancy. These events appeared to evoke vulnerable feelings of inability to help and intense compassion, which led to further emotional, cognitive, and behavioural responses. Difficulty in acknowledging distress and fear of stigma presented significant barriers to accessing support. These barriers may be overcome by educating both ambulance personnel and their supervisors to recognize and tolerate the vulnerable feelings often evoked by critical incidents. While gender and length of service did not seem to impact on evoked emotions, recent recruits may be more open to this type of education.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678370903057317

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Halpern, J., Gurevich, M., Schwartz, B., & Brazeau, P.
Affiliations
  • Mount Sinai Hospital (CA)
  • Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Halpern, Janice
ORCID
Halpern, Janice
Venue
Work & Stress
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2009-04
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
173-189
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
DOI
10.1080/02678370903057317
OpenAlex
W1970644865
Cited by
124
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Work & Stress (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Burnout
Keywords
critical incidents, ambulance personnel, emergency medical services, occupational stress, emotional responses, compassion, patient death, stigma, helplessness, distress, supervisor education, workplace interventions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review