Background Clinical supervision has been defined as ‘an exchange between practicing professionals to enable the development of professional skills’ (Faugier & Butterworth, 1994): Conversely, Hyrkas et al suggested that although clinical supervision is encouraged widely in nursing literature, studies carried out (to the date of their published work) had failed to evidence how supervision benefits clinical practice (Hyrkas, Koivula, Paunomon, 1999). More recent research, however, suggests that clinical supervision supports practice and helps healthcare practitioners maintain and improve standards by reflecting and identifying workable strategies for future work (Sullivan & Garland, 2013). Because of this, clinical supervision is central to the process of lifelong learning and the benefits of clinical supervision outweigh its costs (Doncaster & Bassetlaw Hospital, 2016). In the hospice setting, clinical supervision holds several challenges, with synchronising availability between clinical staff and facilitators being a significant factor within the inpatient unit.
Aims The aim of the project was to offer a meaningful clinical supervision resource to inpatient unit staff in line with the support being offered by the organisation to members of other teams. The Nursing & Midwifery Council (NMC, 2018) states that clinical supervision should be available to registered nurses throughout their careers so they can constantly evaluate and improve their contribution to the care of people but identifying and testing a method which is workable for inpatient unit staff has been challenging, especially during a pandemic.
Diarised group work with designated facilitators mixing members with varying job roles across the hospice with a generic scenario to discuss.
Regular virtual sessions throughout the month organised by remote facilitator.
Results * Method 1 attendance (Q4). Two staff members over four hours clinical supervision.
* Method 2 attendance (Q4). 14 staff members over seven hours clinical supervision.
Conclusions It is clear to see from the above results that method 2 is a significantly more efficient way of engaging with staff than method 1.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.