Clinical Supervision Models for Non-specialist Providers Delivering Psychotherapy: A Qualitative Analysis.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Nicole Andrejek, Paula Ravitz, Kaspars Mikelsteins, Laura La Porte, J Jo Kim, Crystal E Schiller, Mae Lynn Reyes-Rodríguez, Lucy C Barker, Cindy-Lee Dennis, Richard K Silver, Samantha Meltzer-Brody, Daisy R Singla
{"title":"Clinical Supervision Models for Non-specialist Providers Delivering Psychotherapy: A Qualitative Analysis.","authors":"Nicole Andrejek, Paula Ravitz, Kaspars Mikelsteins, Laura La Porte, J Jo Kim, Crystal E Schiller, Mae Lynn Reyes-Rodríguez, Lucy C Barker, Cindy-Lee Dennis, Richard K Silver, Samantha Meltzer-Brody, Daisy R Singla","doi":"10.1007/s10488-025-01450-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Trained non-specialist providers (NSPs), with no formal degree in mental healthcare, can deliver effective psychotherapies for task-sharing. Clinical supervision is important in this process to facilitate quality-assured psychotherapy. We explored three group supervision models within a large, multi-site trial that leveraged NSPs to deliver a brief psychotherapy. In-depth, semi-structured interviews with NSPs (n = 15) explored facilitators and barriers of group supervision models in a stepwise approach, that progressed from expert-led to peer-led, with monthly measurement-based supervision throughout. A focus group on measurement-based supervision was also conducted with clinical experts who provided supervision (n = 4). Qualitative data were analyzed using content and thematic analysis. In expert-led supervision, perceived facilitators among NSPs (n = 15) included educational and professional development (n = 14/15, 93.33%), emotional support (n = 11/15, 77.33%), and expert advice in specific delivery techniques (n = 4/15, 26.67%). A barrier was scheduling (n = 6/15, 40.00%). In peer-led supervision, perceived facilitators among participating NSPs (n = 12) included learning opportunities with peers from diverse backgrounds (n = 10/12, 83.33%), fostering peer connections (n = 9/12, 75.00%), and professional growth (n = 6/12, 50.00%). Barriers included reduced structure (n = 6/12, 50.00%) and attendance (n = 3/12, 25.00%). In measurement-based supervision, reported facilitators included listening to peer's audio-recorded sessions (n = 14/15, 93.33%), receiving and providing feedback (n = 13/15, 86.67%), and the supervision model's structure and tools (n = 5/15, 33.33%). Barriers included low self-ratings (n = 12/15, 80.00%) and initial uncertainty on how to provide constructive feedback (n = 6/15, 40.00%). These facilitators and barriers were also reported by the clinical experts (n = 4). Our results highlight the need to produce clear and concrete guidelines to facilitate peer-led and measurement-based supervision, which will support the implementation of task-sharing.</p>","PeriodicalId":7195,"journal":{"name":"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-025-01450-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Trained non-specialist providers (NSPs), with no formal degree in mental healthcare, can deliver effective psychotherapies for task-sharing. Clinical supervision is important in this process to facilitate quality-assured psychotherapy. We explored three group supervision models within a large, multi-site trial that leveraged NSPs to deliver a brief psychotherapy. In-depth, semi-structured interviews with NSPs (n = 15) explored facilitators and barriers of group supervision models in a stepwise approach, that progressed from expert-led to peer-led, with monthly measurement-based supervision throughout. A focus group on measurement-based supervision was also conducted with clinical experts who provided supervision (n = 4). Qualitative data were analyzed using content and thematic analysis. In expert-led supervision, perceived facilitators among NSPs (n = 15) included educational and professional development (n = 14/15, 93.33%), emotional support (n = 11/15, 77.33%), and expert advice in specific delivery techniques (n = 4/15, 26.67%). A barrier was scheduling (n = 6/15, 40.00%). In peer-led supervision, perceived facilitators among participating NSPs (n = 12) included learning opportunities with peers from diverse backgrounds (n = 10/12, 83.33%), fostering peer connections (n = 9/12, 75.00%), and professional growth (n = 6/12, 50.00%). Barriers included reduced structure (n = 6/12, 50.00%) and attendance (n = 3/12, 25.00%). In measurement-based supervision, reported facilitators included listening to peer's audio-recorded sessions (n = 14/15, 93.33%), receiving and providing feedback (n = 13/15, 86.67%), and the supervision model's structure and tools (n = 5/15, 33.33%). Barriers included low self-ratings (n = 12/15, 80.00%) and initial uncertainty on how to provide constructive feedback (n = 6/15, 40.00%). These facilitators and barriers were also reported by the clinical experts (n = 4). Our results highlight the need to produce clear and concrete guidelines to facilitate peer-led and measurement-based supervision, which will support the implementation of task-sharing.

提供心理治疗的非专业提供者的临床监督模式:定性分析。
训练有素的非专业提供者(NSPs),没有正式的精神保健学位,可以为任务分担提供有效的心理治疗。临床监督在这个过程中很重要,以促进有质量保证的心理治疗。我们在一项大型、多地点试验中探索了三种小组监督模式,利用nsp提供简短的心理治疗。与nsp (n = 15)进行深入的半结构化访谈,以逐步的方法探讨了小组监督模式的促进因素和障碍,从专家主导发展到同伴主导,并在整个过程中每月进行基于测量的监督。以测量为基础的监督为焦点小组,由临床专家提供监督(n = 4)。定性数据采用内容分析和专题分析。在专家主导的监督中,nsp (n = 15)认为促进因素包括教育和专业发展(n = 14/15, 93.33%)、情感支持(n = 11/15, 77.33%)和具体交付技术的专家建议(n = 4/15, 26.67%)。一个障碍是调度(n = 6/15, 40.00%)。在同伴领导的监督中,参与的nsp (n = 12)认为促进因素包括与不同背景的同伴学习的机会(n = 10/12, 83.33%)、促进同伴关系(n = 9/12, 75.00%)和专业成长(n = 6/12, 50.00%)。障碍包括结构减少(n = 6/12, 50.00%)和出勤率减少(n = 3/12, 25.00%)。在基于测量的监督中,报告的辅助因素包括听取同伴录音(n = 14/15, 93.33%),接收和提供反馈(n = 13/15, 86.67%),以及监督模型的结构和工具(n = 5/15, 33.33%)。障碍包括低自我评价(n = 12/15, 80.00%)和最初不确定如何提供建设性反馈(n = 6/15, 40.00%)。这些促进因素和障碍也由临床专家报告(n = 4)。我们的研究结果突出表明,需要制定明确和具体的指导方针,以促进以同行为主导和基于测量的监督,这将支持任务分担的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.70%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: The aim of Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services is to improve mental health services through research. This journal primarily publishes peer-reviewed, original empirical research articles.  The journal also welcomes systematic reviews. Please contact the editor if you have suggestions for special issues or sections focusing on important contemporary issues.  The journal usually does not publish articles on drug or alcohol addiction unless it focuses on persons who are dually diagnosed. Manuscripts on children and adults are equally welcome. Topics for articles may include, but need not be limited to, effectiveness of services, measure development, economics of mental health services, managed mental health care, implementation of services, staffing, leadership, organizational relations and policy, and the like.  Please review previously published articles for fit with our journal before submitting your manuscript.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信