Models of remote professional supervision for psychologists in rural and remote locations: A systematic review

• Published in: The Australian journal of rural health Vol. 29; no. 2; pp. 211 - 225
• Main Authors: Varela, Sharon M., Hays, Catherine, Knight, Sabina, Hays, Richard
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Australia Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.04.2021; John Wiley and Sons Inc
• Subjects: Australia; Clinical outcomes; Data; education; Efficacy; Health psychology; Health Workforce; Humans; labor force; Medical personnel; models of remote supervision; patients; Pennsylvania; Personnel Management; professional supervision; Professions; Psychologists; psychology; Psychology - standards; Reproducibility of Results; Research methodology; rural and remote practice; rural health; Rural Health Services; Rural Population; Shortages; Statistical analysis; Supervision; supervisory experiences; Systematic Review; Workforce; Australia; Pennsylvania; professional supervision; supervisory experiences; models of remote supervision; psychologists; rural and remote practice
• ISSN: 1038-5282; 1440-1584; 1440-1584
• DOI: 10.1111/ajr.12740

Introduction Psychology workforce shortages in geographically rural or remote contexts have highlighted the need to understand the supervisory experiences of psychologists practising in these locations, and the models of supervision employed to support their practice and improve client safety. Objective To review the models of remote professional supervision and the supervisory experiences of psychologists practising in rural and remote locations. Design Using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for mixed‐methods systematic review, 8 health and education databases were searched using keyword and subject heading searches. Findings The initial search identified 413 studies. A full‐text review identified 4 papers that met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to a methodological appraisal by 2 reviewers. Three studies included qualitative data, with 2 using transcribed interviews. Two studies reported quantitative data, with only one study including a statistical analysis of the outcomes. Discussion The results for the efficacy of the current models of remote supervision being used within the allied health and psychology professions are limited, with methodological limitations cautioning generalisability of results. The experiences of psychologists engaged in remote supervision do not appear to have changed over the past decade despite technological advances. Conclusions Quality professional supervision is critical for the sustainability of the psychology workforce in rural and remote locations, reducing professional isolation, and for improved patient outcomes. This review identified a need for improved evidence for remote supervision models for psychologists working in geographically rural and remote locations. Lessons can be learned from other health professions’ models of remote supervision.