![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Background
Burnout is a growing problem in mental health‐care professionals. Clinical supervision is a mandated part of all psychological therapeutic practice but no previous study has explored whether higher quality supervision is associated with lower burnout in qualified psychological therapists.
Aims
The study aimed to investigate whether the quality of the supervisory relationship was associated with two facets of burnout, exhaustion and disengagement, in a group of psychological therapists once work demands had been accounted for.
Methods
Psychological therapists were recruited to complete a cross‐sectional online survey between May 2016 and January 2017. The survey measured frequency and quality of clinical supervision, workload factors, and disengagement and burnout. Data were analysed using hierarchical linear regression.
Results
Two hundred and ninety‐eight qualified psychological therapists responded to the survey. Results suggested that higher quality supervision was associated with lower disengagement but not lower exhaustion. Frequency of supervision and workload variables were not associated with either facet of burnout. Female gender was associated with higher exhaustion but gender had no association with disengagement. According to previously used cut‐off scores, 235 (78.9%) participants could be classed as suffering from “high burnout,” and 173 (58.1%) participants could be classed as suffering from “high disengagement.”
Conclusions
There is a growing need for burnout reduction interventions in mental health‐care professionals. The present results identify a potential role for enhancing the quality of the supervisory relationship by creating more open, safe spaces for supervisees.
Catherine Corker, Ribblemere Mother and Baby Unit, Chorley, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Funding information NIHR CLAHRC YH, Grant/Award Number: NIHR ISCLA‐ 0113‐10020; NIHR PSTRC YH
Catherine Corker, Ribblemere Mother and Baby Unit, Chorley, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Funding information NIHR CLAHRC YH, Grant/Award Number: NIHR ISCLA‐ 0113‐10020; NIHR PSTRC YH
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors disclosed receipt of the following support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This article presents independent research supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Yorkshire and Humber Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR YH PSTRC) and NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Yorkshire and Humber (NIHR CLAHRC YH): www.clahrc-yh.nir.ac.uk. (Reference: NIHR ISCLA‐0113‐10020). The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. The research was supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Yorkshire and Humber: www.clahrc-yh.nihr.ac.uk. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health. (Reference: NIHR IS‐CLA‐0113‐10020).
Notes
Catherine Corker, Ribblemere Mother and Baby Unit, Chorley, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Funding information NIHR CLAHRC YH, Grant/Award Number: NIHR ISCLA‐ 0113‐10020; NIHR PSTRC YH