Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T21:20:08.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving CBT supervision. Four years of implementing NES Specialist Supervision Training for CBT in Scotland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2020

Nathan O’Neill Open the ORCID record for Nathan O’Neill [Opens in a new window] ,
Mairi Albiston Open the ORCID record for Mairi Albiston [Opens in a new window] ,
Sandra Ferguson  and
Leeanne Nicklas
Nathan O’Neill
Affiliation:
Esteem Offices, Leverndale Hospital, GlasgowG53 7TU, UK
Mairi Albiston
Affiliation:
NHS Education for Scotland, Psychology Directorate, GlasgowG3 8BW, UK
Sandra Ferguson
Affiliation:
NHS Education for Scotland, Psychology Directorate, GlasgowG3 8BW, UK
Leeanne Nicklas*
Affiliation:
NHS Education for Scotland, Psychology Directorate, GlasgowG3 8BW, UK
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

NHS Education for Scotland (NES) plays a lead role in training the NHS Psychological Therapies workforce across Scotland. Ferguson et al. (2016) outlined the challenges, opportunities and proposed evaluation of the NES Specialist Supervision Training in Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (NESSST-CBT). The aims of the training were to provide an evidence-based, flexible and learner-focused training in CBT specific supervision competencies. This paper will provide an update on the evaluation of the training using Kirkpatrick’s Impact Evaluation Model (1967, 1987). Results indicate that: (1) delegates rated the training experience positively in various ways; (2) delegates described increases in their confidence and competence in using structured measures of CBT and supervision; (3) a majority of delegates completing a 3-month follow-up questionnaire described continued use of a structured CBT measure in supervision and for self-reflection; and (4) 392 psychological therapists in Scotland have now been formally trained in CBT specific supervision skills. NESSST-CBT continues to adapt and improve as a resource for staff as NES moves forward in its Digital Strategy for Scotland’s NHS and partnership staff. Further implications of this are discussed, as well as limitations of the study.

Key learning aims

  1. (1) Readers will be able to further understand the multi-faceted role of NHS Education for Scotland in implementing CBT supervision training in Scotland.

  2. (2) Readers will be able to list three key outcomes from the feedback data on 4 years of a specialist supervision blended-learning training for CBT supervision.

  3. (3) Readers will be able to identify three key limitations of the study and recommendations for future research.

Keywords

CBTcompetencyKirkpatricksupervision
Type
Education and Supervision
Information
the Cognitive Behaviour Therapist , Volume 13 , 2020 , e18
Copyright
© British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further reading

Ferguson, S., Harper, S., Platz, S., Sloan, G., & Smith, K. (2016) Developing specialist CBT Supervision training in Scotland using blended learning: challenges and opportunities. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 9, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, D. L. (2017). Evidence-Based Clinical Supervision: Principles and Practice. John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
NHS Education for Scotland (NES) Website: https://www.nes.scot.nhs.uk/Google Scholar
Roth, A. D., & Pilling, S. (2008). A competence framework for the supervision of psychological therapies. Available at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/CORE/Google Scholar

References

Adams, A. S., Soumerai, S.B., Lomas, J. and Ross-Degnan, D. (1999). Evidence of self-report bias in assessing adherence to guidelines. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 11, 187–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barber, J. P., Liese, B. S., & Abrams, M. J. (2006). Development of the Cognitive Therapy Adherence and Competence Scale. Psychotherapy Research, 13, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, I. M., James, I. A., Milne, D. L., Baker, C., Standart, S., Garland, A., & Reichelt, F. K. (2001). The revised Cognitive Therapy Scale (CTS-R): psychometric properties. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29, 431–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. R., Rawana, E. P., & Capponi, D. K. (1989). Acceptability of behavioural staff management techniques. Behavioural Residential Treatment, 4, 23–44.Google Scholar
Eccles, M. P., & Mittman, B. S. (2006). Welcome to implementation science. Implementation Science, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, S., Harper, S., Platz, S., Sloan, G., & Smith, K. (2016). Developing specialist CBT Supervision training in Scotland using blended learning: challenges and opportunities. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 9, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, I. A., Blackburn, I.-M., & Reichelt, F. K. (2001). Manual of the Revised Cognitive Therapy Scale (CTS-R). Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Keen, A. J. A., & Freeston, M. H. (2008). Assessing competence in cognitive-behavioural therapy. British Journal of Psychiatry, 193, 60–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1967). Evaluation of training. In Craig, R. L., & Bittel, L. R. (eds), Training and Development Handbook, pp. 87–112. New York, USA: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1987). Evaluation of training. In Craig, R. L., & Bittle, L.R. (eds), Training and Development Handbook: A Guide to Human Resource Development (3rd edn), pp. 301–309. New York, USA: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Meyers, D. C., Durlak, J. A., & Wandersman, A. (2012). The Quality Implementation Framework: a synthesis of critical steps in the implementation process. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 462–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milne, D. L. (2017). Evidence-Based CBT Supervision: Principles and Practice. John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, D. L., Leck, C., James, I., Wilson, M., Proctor, R., Ramm, L., Wilkinson, J., & Weetman, J. (2012). High fidelity in clinical supervision research. In Fleming, I., & Steen, L. (eds), Supervision and Clinical Psychology (2nd edn), chapter 9, pp. 142–158. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Milne, D. L., Reiser, R. P., Cliffe, T., & Raine, R. (2011). SAGE: preliminary evaluation of an instrument for observing competence in CBT supervision. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 4, 123–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, D. L., & Reiser, R. P. (2014). SAGE: a Scale for Rating Competence in CBT Supervision. In Watkins, C. E., and Milne, D. L. (eds), The Wiley International Handbook of Clinical Supervision, pp. 402–415, Chichester, UK: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muse, K., & McManus, F. (2013). A systematic review of methods for assessing competence in cognitive behavioural therapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 484–499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
NHS Education for Scotland (NES) (2015). The Matrix: a guide to delivering evidence-based psychological therapies in Scotland. NHS Education for Scotland, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Owens, K. M., & Keller, S. (2018). Exploring workforce confidence and patient experiences: a quantitative analysis. Patient Experience Journal, 5, 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reio, T. G. Jr, Rocco, T., Smith, D. H., & Chang, E. (2017). A Critique of Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Model. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 29, 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiser, R., Cliffe, T., & Milne, D. L. (2018). An improved competence rating scale for CBT Supervision: Short-SAGE. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 11, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roth, A. D. (2016). A new scale for the assessment of competences in cognitive and behavioural therapy. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 44, 620–624.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roth, A., & Pilling, S. (2008). A competence framework for the supervision of psychological therapies. Available at: www.ucl.ac.uk/clinical-psychology/CORE/supervision_framework.htmlGoogle Scholar
Safran, J. D., Segal, Z. V., & Vallis, T. M. (1993). Assessing patient suitability for short term cognitive therapy with an interpersonal focus. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 17, 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scottish Government (2012). NHS Scotland performance against LDP standards, https://www.gov.scot/publications/nhsscotland-performance-against-ldp-standards/pages/psychological-therapies-waiting-times/Google Scholar
von Consbruch, K., Clark, D. M., & Stangier, U. (2012). Assessing therapeutic competence in cognitive therapy for social phobia: psychometric properties of the cognitive therapy competence scale for social phobia (CTCS-SP). Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 42, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., Blachman, M., Dunville, R., & Saul, J. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: the interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.