Search results

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the current evidence regarding the content of clinical supervision for nursing and allied health professionals.

The authors searched CINAHL, Medline, PsychINFO and Cochrane Database. Studies were included if the participants involved were nursing, medical or allied health practitioners, but not students, and if the studies contained discussion regarding the content of clinical supervision. Critical analysis of the articles was carried out by two independent researchers to ensure consistency and thematic analysis was applied.

Twenty included articles were in three main categories: cross‐sectional studies (n=9), including interview, survey and focus group methods of data collection; literature reviews (n=2); and nine published opinion pieces. Themes related to the content of clinical supervision that were identified were reflective practice; task oriented content; diversity of content; and stress management. The results indicated that current research into the content of clinical supervision for nursing and allied health practitioners is limited and of low quality and that further research is needed to determine what content in clinical supervision is associated with better quality and safety, particularly for health professions other than nursing and psychology.

This is the first review of the current evidence for what constitutes the most appropriate content of clinical supervision for health professionals. Clinical supervision is an important component of quality assurance and clinical governance frameworks and it is essential that health care organizations are assured that effective clinical supervision is in place.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse existing clinical supervision frameworks to develop a supervision meta-model.

This research involved a thematic analysis of existing supervision frameworks used to support allied health practitioners working in rural or remote settings in Australia to identify key domains of supervision which could form the basis of supervision framework in this context. A three-tiered sampling approach of the selection of supervision frameworks ensured the direct relevance of the final domains identified to Australian rural allied health practitioners, allied health practitioners generally and to the wider area of health supervision. Thematic analysis was undertaken by Framework analysis methodology using Mindmapping software. The results were organised into a new conceptual model which places the practitioner at the centre of supervision.

The review included 17 supervision frameworks, encompassing 13 domains of supervision: definitions; purpose and function; supervision models; contexts; content; Modes of engagement; Supervisor attributes; supervisory relationships; supervisor responsibilities; supervisee responsibilities; structures/process for supervision and support; facilitators and barriers; outcomes. The authors developed a reflective, supervision and support framework “Connecting Practice” that is practitioner centred, recognises the tacit and explicit knowledge that staff bring to the relationship, and enables them to identify their own goals and support networks within the context in which they work.

This is a thematic analysis of the literature which was argely based on an analysis of grey literature.

The resulting core domains of supervision provide an evidence-based foundation for the development of clinical supervision models which can be adapted to a range of contexts.

An outcome of this paper is a framework called Connecting Practice which organises the domains of supervision in a temporal way, separating those domains that can be modified to improve the supervision framework, from those which are less easily modifiable. This approach is important to help embed the implementation of supervision and support into organisational practice. This paper adds to the existing growing body of work around supervision by helping understand the domains or components that make up the supervisory experience.

Connecting Practice replaces traditional, more hierarchical models of supervision to put the practitioner at the centre of a personalised supervision and support network.

The UK government proposals for services for individuals considered to be dangerous with a severe personality disorder (DSPD) are developing. The complex task of balancing safety and therapeutic change in DSPD services will rest largely upon the skills, knowledge and practice of the staff group. As a result, one challenge for DSPD services is to provide sufficient training and support to staff, in order to ensure that adequate resources are available to assist them in processing their emotional reactions to their work. As part of this, clinical supervision systems need to be developed to offer professional support and learning, enabling individual practitioners to develop knowledge and competence and assume responsibility for their own practice (DoH, 1993). Among the service developments at Rampton Hospital an innovative multi‐professional supervision strategy has been introduced for all staff working in the unit. This paper describes the evolving supervision framework, including a new tool, the ‘Supervision Matrix’, and implementation guidelines, and describes how this supervision framework will be evaluated.

The purpose of this paper is to systematically identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative literature exploring the experience, both positive and negative, of clinical supervision from the supervisor’s perspective.

A systematic search of three databases, grey literature, reference lists and citations was conducted. Six articles met the inclusion criteria and their quality was critically appraised by using a modified version of the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. Data extracted from the articles were synthesised using meta-ethnography.

Four key themes were identified: experiencing difficulties in clinical supervision, responsibility, similarities to therapy and capabilities as a supervisor. These demonstrated that the role of a supervisor has the potential to be both beneficial and harmful to personal and professional development.

The quality of the studies was variable. Further research is required to explore how supervisors manage difficult experiences to ensure personal development and growth.

Clinical implications include the need for employers to consider the additional pressure associated with providing clinical supervision and to ensure that appropriate support is available. Results complement previous research on the bi-directionality of parallel process in clinical supervision.

This review presents an original synthesis of the supervisor’s experience of delivering clinical supervision to qualified therapists. This is achieved by utilising a systematic methodology and appraising the quality of the studies included. The review highlights how the effects of clinical supervision are not limited to the supervisee, but also experienced by the supervisor. The competing demands and responsibilities associated with clinical supervision impact upon the supervisor’s experience, both positively and negatively. When beneficial, delivering clinical supervision can lead to personal and professional growth in addition to the acquisition of new skills.

Stress and burnout are continuous concerns in clinical settings. This has been exacerbated due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic which has impacted health-care professionals globally. Supervision can support staff in clinical setting and help prevent stress and burnout. The purpose of this review is to consider the efficacy of mobile apps for reducing stress and burnout in clinical settings and supervisions.

A comprehensive literature search was carried out using online databases such as Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, PsychARTICLES, MEDLINE and SAGE. From the searches, nine studies were included in the review after meeting the inclusion criteria.

Of the nine studies, eight related to stress and/or burnout and one related to work engagement. There were no specific studies which related directly to the use of mobile health (mHealth) for clinical supervision.

Through a focus on the efficacy of mHealth for stress and burnout in clinical settings and supervisions, the review highlights the efficacy of mHealth apps used in for stress and burnout in clinical settings and the importance of engagement of clinical staff. This will not only provide a higher quality of empirical evidence, but it will also lead to more positive outcomes for the mental health of clinical staff.

This review focussed upon the efficacy of mHealth for stress and burnout in clinical settings and supervisions. In comparison to previous reviews, this review differs because it combines both stress and burnout and clinical supervisions as the focal areas for improvement via the use of mHealth.

The purpose of this study was to describe effective clinical supervisory behavior as perceived by school principals and to contrast the findings with other current studies of clinical supervision. Three aspects of a principal's supervisory behavior were studied, the verbal behavior used by the principal with the teacher in post‐observation lesson analysis sessions, the basis of authority the principal had over the teachers, and the frequency of clinical supervisory behavior. Sixty‐five principals completed a Q‐sort that described eight different supervisors and rated them from most to least effective. Only the principal's supervisory verbal behavior was perceived as related to the perception of effective clinical supervision.

The purpose of this paper is to conduct a preliminary evaluation of psychological-based supervision and consultation provided by a clinical psychologist to nursing staff working in a low-secure Learning Disability Forensic Service.

A questionnaire was completed by 22 staff members, to gather information about their experiences of receiving this service and its impact on the motivation, stress and the care they provide for patients within the service.

The most common reasons for staff to attend were to discuss patient issues (n=10), needing space to reflect (n=10) and wanting to discuss service issues (n=9). Staff found these sessions to be supportive (n=13), useful (n=11), helpful (n=11) and informative (n=11). A majority of staff reported an increase in positive interactions (60 per cent, n=9) and in motivation (60 per cent, n=9) and a reduction in stress (43.7 per cent, n=7). Of staff answering the question 87.5 per cent (n=16) would recommend these sessions to others.

The findings suggest that staff benefitted from having this opportunity to discuss patient and service issues and that this had a positive impact on their role and the care they provide.

Therefore, the paper suggests that by offering psychological supervision and consultation will provide support to nurses working in Learning Disability Forensic Service, increase motivation and reduce stress. These findings could also be used by management in service development, for example to reduce staff sickness and subsequently reduce costs within the service.

Clinical supervision is a crucial workplace practice for professional learning and development. Research is needed to investigate in detail what happens in supervision to understand how this practice contributes to learning. This paper aims to examine how professionals work with knowledge and navigate epistemic challenges in working with problems of practice.

Three pairs of psychologists audio-recorded five consecutive supervision sessions and were interviewed twice during that time. Analysis considered supervision as a site of emergent learning, focusing on what was discussed and how problems were worked on, whether as epistemic objects (open-ended, aimed at generating new insights) or by using an approach to knowledge objects that focused more directly on what to do next.

One pair consistently adopted an epistemic object approach, while another was consistently more action-oriented, focused on knowledge objects. The third pair used both approaches, sometimes expanding the object with a view to gaining insight and understanding, while at other times focusing on next steps and future action.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to study clinical supervision in terms of how knowledge work is done. Foregrounding the epistemic dimensions of supervision, it reveals previously unexplored but consequential differences in how knowledge is worked with and produced as supervisory pairs discuss complex issues of practice.

This article explores professional self‐regulation in the context of clinical governance. It begins by explaining clinical governance’s origins before setting out a framework in which the Department of Health expects managers and practitioners to work. Description, analysis and synthesis of professional self‐regulation issues, operating within a clinical governance framework, are greatly enhanced by comment drawn from the theoretical and empirical literature.

The principal purpose of this article was to identify supervisory approaches available to instructional leaders in education. Selected supervisory approaches served as the basis for creating the Supervisory Options for Instructional Leaders (SOIL) Model. Instructional leaders in a variety of educational settings could use this model. The SOIL Model is divided into three levels of supervision. The supervisory approaches included in each level are placed along a continuum of reward and risk. Reward is defined as “something given or offered for some service or attainment” (Mish, 1989, p. 628). Risk is defined by Mish (1989) as “the exposure to possible loss or injury” (p. 632).

As the instructional leader and teacher develop in the supervisory process, it is proposed that the approach of supervision used should change. As professional readiness increases and as the circumstances dictate, the instructional leader should progress in an upward direction on the continuum and facilitate more teacher-directed approaches of supervision. With teacher-directed approaches of supervision, instructional leaders and teachers may experience greater reward from the supervisory process.