Evidence‐based practice within supervision during psychology practitioner training: A systematic review

Supervisor versus self-assessment of trainee competence: Differences across developmental stages and competency domains

OBJECTIVES

This research aimed to systematically examine supervisor-trainee differences in assessments of trainee competencies across domains and developmental stages.

METHODS

Trainees and supervisors (N = 141 dyads) independently rated trainee performance at the end of placements using the Clinical Psychology Competencies Rating Scale. Based on the number of placement hours completed at the time competence was assessed, the 141 trainees were assigned to three developmental levels (61, 42, and 31 in the groups, respectively). Trajectories of 10 different competencies and trainee-supervisor differences for these competencies were examined across three developmental levels.

RESULTS

Compared to their supervisor ratings, trainees underestimated their competence during early stages of training, with this discrepancy reducing at Level 2 and reversing into an overestimation at Level 3. Compared to their own ratings for overall competence, trainees rated Relational and Communication, Reflective Practice, and Professionalism domains as relative strengths, and rated their competence on assessment and intervention domains as relative weaknesses.

CONCLUSION

Growth trajectories derived from supervisor assessments were much flatter than trajectories derived from trainee assessments. As predicted by the impostor theory of practitioner development, trainees significantly underestimated their competence early in training. The trend for trainees to overestimate their competence toward the end of their training is a potential concern that warrants further research.

Testing the effectiveness and acceptability of online supportive supervision for mental health practitioners in humanitarian settings: a study protocol for the caring for carers project

BACKGROUND

Local humanitarian workers in low and middle-income countries must often contend with potentially morally injurious situations, often with limited resources. This creates barriers to providing sustainable mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) to displaced individuals. Clinical supervision is an often neglected part of ensuring high-quality, sustainable care. The Caring for Carers (C4C) project aims to test the effectiveness and acceptability of online group-based supportive supervision on the well-being of MHPSS practitioners, as well as service-user-reported service satisfaction and quality when working with displaced communities in Türkiye, Syria, and Bangladesh. This protocol paper describes the aim, design, and methodology of the C4C project.

METHOD

A quasi-experimental, mixed-method, community-based participatory research study will be conducted to test the effectiveness of online group-based supportive clinical supervision provided to 50 Syrian and 50 Bangladeshi MHPSS practitioners working with Syrian and Rohingya displaced communities. Monthly data will be collected from the practitioners and their beneficiaries during the active control (six months) and supervision period (16 months over two terms). Outcomes are psychological distress (Kessler-6), burnout (the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory), compassion fatigue, compassion satisfaction, and secondary traumatic stress (Professional Quality of Life Scale), perceived injustice, clinical self-efficacy (Counseling Activity Self-Efficacy Scale), service satisfaction, and quality (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire and an 18-item measure developed in this project). A realist evaluation framework will be used to elucidate the contextual factors, mechanisms, and outcomes of the supervision intervention.

DISCUSSION

There is a scarcity of evidence on the role of clinical supervision in improving the well-being of MHPSS practitioners and the quality of service they provide to displaced people. By combining qualitative and quantitative data collection, the C4C project will address the long-standing question of the effectiveness and acceptability of clinical supervision in humanitarian settings.

A Behavior-based Coding Tool for Assessing Supervisors' Adherence and Competence: Findings From a Motivational Interviewing Implementation Study

Supervision seems to be an essential part of therapist training, and thus also of implementing evidence-based practices. However, there is a shortage of valid and reliable instruments for objective assessment of supervision competence that include both global measures and frequency counts of behavior - two essential aspects of supervisory competence. This study tests the internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of an assessment tool that includes both these measures. Additionally, strategies and techniques used by ten supervisors in 35 Motivational interviewing supervision sessions are described. Codings were conducted after two separate coding training sessions. The internal consistency across the global measures was acceptable (α = 0.70; 0.71). After the second training, the inter-rater reliabilities for all frequency counts were in the moderate to good range, except for two that were in the poor range; inter-rater reliability for one of the four global measures was in the moderate range, and three were in the poor range. A prerequisite for identifying specific supervisor skills central to the development of therapist skills, teaching these skills to supervisors, and performing quality assurance of supervision, is to create instruments that can measure these behaviors. This study is a step in that direction.

ANZAED practice and training standards for mental health professionals providing eating disorder treatment

INTRODUCTION

The Australia & New Zealand Academy for Eating Disorders (ANZAED) recently developed general principles and clinical practice standards recommended for mental health clinicians and dietitians providing treatment for people with eating disorders. Separate mental health practice and training standards were then devised as a foundation for strengthening the workforce and providing guidance to professional training programs and service providers on the minimal standards required for practice in the eating disorder field.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The present recommendations for mental health professionals providing eating disorder treatment describe the following practice and training standards: eating disorder treatment foundations (including co-ordination of services, establishing a positive therapeutic alliance, professional responsibility and knowledge of levels of care), assessment, diagnosis, intervention (including evidence-based intervention, managing psychiatric risk and managing co-morbid mental health problems), and monitoring and evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Further work is required to disseminate these standards to clinicians providing services across Australia to people with eating disorders, and to support adherence in the clinic room where they can translate to improved outcomes for clients. Pathways to supporting adherence include expert supervision of practice, incorporation in training and supervised practice in university settings, and support with checklists that can be used by consumers and referring professionals.