The subject of evaluating clinical supervision for nurses and health visitors in the United Kingdom is considered in this paper. Some of the methodological problems and possible solutions are debated. A multi-site project funded by the Department of Health is described. The paper seeks to identify the debate which currently surrounds the possibilities of evaluating clinical supervision. Research methods and tools are presented, along with a brief summary of some, and an assessment is made of their potential value. The dilemmas of evaluation on a 'grand scale' are considered and arguments are made for a broad methodological approach to evaluating clinical supervision. [NT Research 1996; 1: 2, 96-101]
Butterworth, T., Faugier, J. Clinical Supervision and Mentorship inNursing. London : Chapman and Hall, 1992.
2.
Dudley, M., Butterworth, T.The costs and some benefits of clinical supervision: an initial exploration . The International Journal of Psychiatric Nursing Research1994; 1:2, 34-40.
3.
Butterworth, T., Faugier, J.Clinical Supervision in Nursing, Midwiferyand Health Visiting. A briefing paper. Manchester:School of Nursing Studies, University of Manchester, 1994.
4.
Butterworth, T., Bishop, V. (eds). Clinical Supervision: A report of the Trust Nurse Executives' Workshops. London: NHS Executive, 1994.
5.
Department of Health.Clinical Supervision . (Conference Proceedings from a na tional conference , Birmingham.) London: NHS Executive, 1995.
6.
Procter, B. In: Hawkins, P., Shoet, R.Supervision in the Helping Professions. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. 1992.
Harris, P.The nurse stress index. Work and Stress1989 ; 3:4, 335-346.
9.
Brown, D., Leary, J., Carson, J., Bartlett, H., Fagin L.Stress and the community mental health nurse: The development of a measure . Journal of Psychiafricand Mental Health Nursing1995; 2: 1-5.
