Clinical Supervision in Four Mental Health Professions: A Review of the Evidence

Abstract

This paper examines a range of theoretical issues and the empirical evidence relating to clinical supervision in four mental health professions, namely clinical psychology, occupational therapy, social work, and speech pathology. Despite the widespread acceptance of the value of supervision among practitioners and the large quantity of literature on the topic, there is very little empirical evidence in this area. It is not clear whether supervision actually produces a change in clinician behaviour, nor whether it produces benefits in terms of client outcomes. To date, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate which styles of supervision are most beneficial for particular types of staff, in terms of their level of experience or learning style. The data suggest that directive forms of supervision, rather than unstructured approaches, are preferred by relatively inexperienced practitioners, and that experienced clinicians also value direct supervision methods when learning new skills or dealing with complex or crisis situations. The available evidence suggests that supervisors typically receive little training in supervision methods. However, to date, we have little information to guide us as to the most effective ways of training supervisors. While acknowledging the urgent need for research, the paper concludes that supervision is likely to form a valuable component of professional development for mental health professionals.The authors thank

The surprisingly weak evidence base for supervision: Findings from a systematic review of research in child welfare practice (2000–2012)

“…Like Spence et al,(2001) they found little evidence concerning the outcomes of supervision, but concluded that there was emerging evidence about the aspects of supervision valued by supervisees − specifically availability, positive relationships, mutual communication, support and delegating responsibility. Skillful supervisors with expertise who were able to provide practical support were particularly appreciated.…”

“…Writers with a behavioral/mental health background (e.g. Spence et al, 2001, Milne, 2010 and social workers in North America who provide clinical social work (i.e. with an emphasis on counseling and psychotherapy) often refer to 'clinical supervision' (Bogo and McKnight, 2006;Renner et al 2009).…”

“…A narrative review by Spence et al (2001) examined research on clinical psychology, occupational therapy and speech pathology as well as social work. They concluded that it was not clear whether supervision had any effect on workers' practice, or whether it led to improved outcomes for consumers.…”

Cross-disciplinary supervision amongst social workers in Aotearoa New Zealand

“…Lastly, there is a view that supervision has become a profession in its own right and learning to become a supervisor is a generic rather than profession-specific process. As such, a need for a common philosophy for clinical supervision has been suggested (Davys & Beddoe, 2008;Mullarkey et al, 2001;Spence et al, 2001). …”

Evaluating the implementation and sustainability of an evidence-based intervention: delivering Triple P within Indigenous child welfare agencies

“…The characteristics of adequate supervision are often not understood or sustained and many supervisors lack the knowledge, skills and tools for effective supervision (Marquez & Kean, 2002;Spence, Jill, Kavanagh, Strong, & Worrall, 2001). Involving the broader workforce in supervision (i.e., both supervisors and peer colleagues) can reduce workload for supervisors, promote practitioner self-regulation and skill development, and build organization capacity .…”