Clinical supervision for allied health staff: necessary but not sufficient

Objectives. The aim of the present study was to explore the perspectives of allied health professionals on appropriate content for effective clinical supervision of staff. Methods. A set of statements regarding clinical supervision was identified from the literature and confirmed through a Q-sort process. The final set was administered as an online survey to 437 allied health professionals working in two Australian health services. Results. Of the 120 respondents, 82 had experienced six or more clinical supervision sessions and were included in the analysis. Respondents suggested that clinical supervision was beneficial to both staff and patients, and was distinct from line management performance monitoring and development. Curiously, some of the respondents did not agree that observation of the supervisee's clinical practice was an aspect of clinical supervision. Conclusions. Although clinical supervision is included as a pillar of clinical governance, current practice may not be effective in addressing clinical risk. Australian health services need clear organisational policies that outline the relationship between supervisor and supervisee, the role and responsibilities of managers, the involvement of patients and the types of situations to be communicated to the line managers.