Skip to content

✪ A randomized controlled trial testing supervision strategies in community mental health

Authors:

Shannon Dorsey, Rashed AlRasheed, Suzanne EU Kerns, Rosemary D Meza, Noah Triplett, Esther Deblinger, Nathaniel Jungbluth, Lucy Berliner, Lavangi Naithani, and Michael D Pullmann

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: May 2025

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Research and Practice

Abstract:

Background

Clinicians need supports beyond training to deliver evidence-based treatments with fidelity. Workplace-based clinical supervision often is a commonly provided support in community mental health, yet too few studies have empirically examined supervision and its impact on clinician fidelity and treatment delivery.

Method

Building on a Washington State-funded evidence-based treatment initiative (CBT+), we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT), testing two supervision conditions delivered by workplace-based supervisors (supervisors employed by community mental health organizations). The RCT followed a supervision-as-usual (SAU) phase for comparison. The treatment of focus was trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT). Clinicians (N = 238) from 25 organizations participated in the study across the SAU baseline and RCT phases. In the RCT phase, clinicians were randomized to either symptom and fidelity monitoring (SFM) or SFM and behavioral rehearsal (SFM + BR). For BR, clinicians engaged in a short role play of an upcoming treatment element. Supervisors delivered both conditions, with regular study monitoring for drift. Clinicians audiorecorded therapy sessions with enrolled clients, and masked coders coded a subset of recordings for adherence to TF-CBT. One hundred and thirty-three clinicians had recorded TF-CBT session data for 258 youth. We examined six adherence outcomes, including potential moderators.

Results

Results of generalized estimating equations indicated that there were no real differences on adherence outcomes for experimental conditions (SFM, SFM + BR) compared to SAU. Adherence scores in the baseline SAU phase and the RCT conditions were high. Only one interaction was significant.

Conclusions

Contrary to our hypotheses, we did not see improvements in adherence with the RCT conditions. However, nonsignificant findings seem best explained by clinicians’ acceptable/high adherence in SAU. This study was conducted within the context of a long-standing, state-funded EBT initiative, in which clinicians and their supervisors receive training and support, and in which participating community mental health organizations have adopted and supported TF-CBT.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01800266

Plain Language Summary

Clinicians often receive training in evidence-based treatments (EBTs), but training alone is not enough for clinicians to deliver EBTs well. They need other supports. One of the necessary supports is clinical supervision. In public community mental health organizations, which are often resource-constrained, routine clinical supervision is a commonly available support. However, its potential for supporting high-quality EBT delivery is not well understood. This study looked at supervision and clinicians’ delivery of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT), an EBT for youth who have mental health problems subsequent to trauma. We found that clinicians who received workplace-based supervision on TF-CBT from TF-CBT-trained supervisors, within the context of a state-funded EBT initiative, delivered TF-CBT well. This initiative supported delivery by providing training and supervisor-specific supports. In a second phase of the study, we rigorously tested supervisors’ use of two specific technique packages. These packages included having supervisors review: (a) graphed client mental health symptoms across treatment and clinicians’ report of TF-CBT elements delivered each session or (b) these plus having clinicians do a brief demonstration of how they would deliver an upcoming TF-CBT element to their client, so supervisors could “see” clinicians’ skill and provide feedback. Contrary to expectations, we did not see important differences in clinicians’ TF-CBT delivery. This may be because the clinicians enrolled in our study were already delivering TF-CBT well and, therefore, there was less opportunity for changes. Future studies should explore if these techniques are more helpful for specific situations or clinicians.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Objective coding of content and techniques in workplace-based supervision of an EBT in public mental health

Authors:

Shannon Dorsey, Suzanne E. U. Kerns, Leah Lucid, Michael D. Pullmann, Julie P. Harrison, Lucy Berliner, Kelly Thompson, and Esther Deblinger

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: January 2018

Read the full text in the open access journal Implementation Science

Abstract:

Background

Workplace-based clinical supervision as an implementation strategy to support evidence-based treatment (EBT) in public mental health has received limited research attention. A commonly provided infrastructure support, it may offer a relatively cost-neutral implementation strategy for organizations. However, research has not objectively examined workplace-based supervision of EBT and specifically how it might differ from EBT supervision provided in efficacy and effectiveness trials.

Methods

Data come from a descriptive study of supervision in the context of a state-funded EBT implementation effort. Verbal interactions from audio recordings of 438 supervision sessions between 28 supervisors and 70 clinicians from 17 public mental health organizations (in 23 offices) were objectively coded for presence and intensity coverage of 29 supervision strategies (16 content and 13 technique items), duration, and temporal focus. Random effects mixed models estimated proportion of variance in content and techniques attributable to the supervisor and clinician levels.

Results

Interrater reliability among coders was excellent. EBT cases averaged 12.4 min of supervision per session. Intensity of coverage for EBT content varied, with some discussed frequently at medium or high intensity (exposure) and others infrequently discussed or discussed only at low intensity (behavior management; assigning/reviewing client homework). Other than fidelity assessment, supervision techniques common in treatment trials (e.g., reviewing actual practice, behavioral rehearsal) were used rarely or primarily at low intensity. In general, EBT content clustered more at the clinician level; different techniques clustered at either the clinician or supervisor level.

Conclusions

Workplace-based clinical supervision may be a feasible implementation strategy for supporting EBT implementation, yet it differs from supervision in treatment trials. Time allotted per case is limited, compressing time for EBT coverage. Techniques that involve observation of clinician skills are rarely used. Workplace-based supervision content appears to be tailored to individual clinicians and driven to some degree by the individual supervisor. Our findings point to areas for intervention to enhance the potential of workplace-based supervision for implementation effectiveness.

Trial registration

NCT01800266, Clinical Trials, Retrospectively Registered (for this descriptive study; registration prior to any intervention [part of phase II RCT, this manuscript is only phase I descriptive results])
**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

Behavioral Rehearsal for Analogue Fidelity: Feasibility in a State-Funded Children’s Mental Health Initiative

Authors:

Shannon Dorsey, Aaron R. Lyon, Michael D. Pullmann, Nathaniel Jungbluth, Lucy Berliner, & Rinad Beidas

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

Subscription Required for Full Text Access

Published: March 2016

Read the full text in the subscription access journal Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research