The objective of this paper was to systematically review and critically evaluate all English language research papers reporting empirical studies of clinical supervision in psychiatric nursing. The first part of the search strategy was a combination of brief and building block strategies in the PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. The second part was a citation pearl growing strategy with reviews of 179 reference lists. In total, the search strategy demonstrated a low level of precision and a high level of recall. Thirty four articles met the criteria of the review and were systematically evaluated using three checklists. The findings were summarized by using a new checklist with nine overall questions regarding the studies' design, methods, findings, and limitations. The studies were categorized as: (i) effect studies; (ii) survey studies; (iii) interview studies; and (iv) case studies. In general, the studies were relatively small scale; they used relatively new and basic methods for data collection and analysis, and rarely included sufficient strategies for identifying confounding factors or how the researchers' preconceptions influenced the analyses. Empirical research of clinical supervision in psychiatric nursing was characterized by a basic lack of agreement about which models and instruments to use. Challenges and recommendations for future research are discussed. Clinical supervision in psychiatric nursing was commonly perceived as a good thing, but there was limited empirical evidence supporting this claim.

The intervention had a positive effect on individuals or wards already actively engaged in clinical supervision, which suggested that individuals and wards without well-established supervision practices may require more comprehensive interventions targeting individual and organizational barriers to clinical supervision.

The objective of this study was to test a model for analysing the possible benefits of clinical supervision. The model suggested a pathway from participation to effectiveness to benefits of clinical supervision, and included possible influences of individual and workplace factors. The study sample was 136 nursing staff members in permanent employment on nine general psychiatric wards and at four community mental health centres at a Danish psychiatric university hospital. Data were collected by means of a set of questionnaires. Participation in clinical supervision was associated with the effectiveness of clinical supervision, as measured by the Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale (MCSS). Furthermore, MCSS scores were associated with benefits, such as increased job satisfaction, vitality, rational coping and less stress, emotional exhaustion, and depersonalization. Multivariate analyses indicated that certain individual and workplace factors were related to subscales of the MCSS, as well as some of the benefits. The study supported the suggested model, but methodological limitations apply.

This paper is a report of an interview study exploring psychiatric hospital nursing staff members' reflections on participating in supervision. Clinical supervision is a pedagogical process designed to direct, develop, and support clinical nurses. Participation rates in clinical supervision in psychiatric settings have been reported to be relatively low. Qualitative research indicates that staff members appreciate clinical supervision, but paradoxically, do not prioritize participation and find participation emotionally challenging. Little is known about these contradictory experiences and how they influence participation rates. Twenty-two psychiatric hospital nursing staff members were interviewed with a semistructured interview guide. Interview transcripts were interpreted by means of Ricoeur's hermeneutic method. The respondents understood clinical supervision to be beneficial, but with very limited impact on their clinical practice. Neither management nor the staff effectively prioritized clinical supervision, which added to a downward spiral where low levels of participation undermined the potential benefits of clinical supervision. The respondents embraced and used alternative forums for getting emotional support among peers, but maintained that formalized supervision was the only forum for reflection that could solve the most difficult situations.