Dawson Margaret, Phillips Bev, Leggat Sandra G
Ballarat Health Services, Queen Elizabeth Centre, Ballarat, Australia.
Aust Health Rev. 2013 May;37(2):262-7. doi: 10.1071/AH11164.
To explore the effectiveness of the current clinical supervision (CS) processes for allied health professionals (AHPs) at a regional health service from the perspective of the supervisor.
A mixed method study with two phases, involving AHPs across nine disciplines, employed at a regional health service and providing CS. In the first phase 14 supervisors participated in focus groups which were followed by the completion of a questionnaire by 26 supervisors.
Focus group results indicated confusion between CS, line and performance management and mentoring. Clinical supervision was perceived to contribute to the quality of patient care and reflective practice. The challenges of time for busy clinical staff were reported. The questionnaire response rate was 52.1% and the mean total score for the questionnaire was 162.96 (s.d. 13.47), being 76% of the maximum possible total score. Clinical supervision was considered to improve care quality despite the avoidance of addressing personal issues. Identified CS improvements included empowerment through education, resources development, streamlined documentation and use of best practice protocols.
The results identified AHP supervisors' perceptions of CS and possible improvements to CS processes, including differentiating CS from line management, protecting CS time and the provision of critical feedback. WHAT IS KNOWN ABOUT THE TOPIC? There are limited published reports about CS for AHPs, with AHP supervisor experience and knowledge not previously reported. WHAT DOES THE PAPER ADD? This is the first study to identify current supervisor understanding and practice of CS for AHPs. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS? CS is a valued activity, the effectiveness of which may be supported by education and resources.
从督导者的角度探讨当前区域卫生服务机构中针对专职医疗人员的临床督导（CS）流程的有效性。
一项分两个阶段的混合方法研究，涉及在区域卫生服务机构工作并提供临床督导的九个学科的专职医疗人员。在第一阶段，14名督导者参加了焦点小组，随后26名督导者完成了一份问卷。
焦点小组结果表明，临床督导、直线管理、绩效管理和指导之间存在混淆。临床督导被认为有助于提高患者护理质量和促进反思性实践。报告了繁忙临床工作人员面临的时间挑战。问卷回复率为52.1%，问卷平均总分是162.96（标准差13.47），占最高可能总分的76%。尽管避免处理个人问题，但临床督导仍被认为可提高护理质量。确定的临床督导改进措施包括通过教育实现赋权、资源开发、简化文档以及使用最佳实践方案。
研究结果确定了专职医疗人员督导者对临床督导的看法以及临床督导流程可能的改进措施，包括区分临床督导与直线管理、保障临床督导时间以及提供关键反馈。关于该主题已知的情况是什么？关于专职医疗人员临床督导的已发表报告有限，此前未报告过专职医疗人员督导者的经验和知识。本文补充了什么？这是第一项确定专职医疗人员督导者当前对临床督导的理解和实践的研究。对从业者有何启示？临床督导是一项有价值的活动，其有效性可通过教育和资源得到支持。
