Instituto de Investigación y Postgrado, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Central de Chile, Santiago 8330507, Chile.
Escuela de Doctorado, Universidad Rovira i Virgili, 43007 Tarragona, Spain.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 6;19(23):16366. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192316366.
(1) Background: This systematic review supported by a bibliometric analysis identified quantitative and qualitative empirical studies that allowed us to respond to the objective of identifying and discussing the scope and limitations of the clinical-psychotherapeutic supervision in virtual modality or telesupervision. (2) Methods: The articles were selected according to the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the eligibility criteria proposed by the PICOS strategy (population, interventions, comparators, outcomes, and study design) based on 396 records of scientifically identified articles in the Journal Citation Report databases of the Web of Science. (3) Results: The literature review stages allowed the selection of three articles, which were added three others that were already included in a previous review, to enrich the analysis and discussion. The results of the present review highlighted aspects of nonverbal communication, alliance, comfort, preference, trust, and construction of professional identity, among others, both considering only the telesupervision format and comparing it with traditional face-to-face supervision. (4) Conclusions: The contributions that these results are providing to the understanding of the scope and limitations of the practice of telesupervision are discussed, also considering its interference in the construction of the professional identity of supervisors and supervisees.
(1) 背景:本系统评价通过文献计量分析支持,确定了定量和定性的实证研究,使我们能够回应识别和讨论临床心理治疗在虚拟模式或远程监督中的范围和局限性的目标。(2) 方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析(PRISMA)指南以及基于科学识别的期刊引文报告数据库中的 Web of Science 中的 396 篇文章记录的 PICOS 策略(人群、干预措施、对照、结果和研究设计)的资格标准,选择了文章。(3) 结果:文献综述阶段允许选择三篇文章,并添加了另外三篇已经包含在前一次综述中的文章,以丰富分析和讨论。本综述的结果强调了非言语交流、联盟、舒适度、偏好、信任和专业身份的构建等方面,同时仅考虑远程监督的格式,并将其与传统的面对面监督进行比较。(4) 结论:讨论了这些结果对理解远程监督实践的范围和局限性的贡献,同时也考虑了它对监督者和被监督者的专业身份构建的干扰。