A Simulation-Based Research Study Exploring the Role of Supervision in Trauma-Informed Practice and Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)

Clinical supervision is often valued as an essential element of social work training and professional practice. For those practitioners working with survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV), regular supervision is vital for their growth and development. However, many IPV practitioners report inconsistent and irregular supervision often due to competing demands and a lack of resources. Since IPV practitioners are frequently also providing service to survivors of IPV who have experienced trauma, access to trauma-informed supervision is essential. Research on supervision is often lacking in social work with little known about supervision in IPV practice and trauma-informed practice. To address this gap, we conducted a simulation-based qualitative research study to explore supervision, trauma-informed practice and ways in which supervisors can effectively support supervisees working in IPV. This poster explores the perspectives, knowledge, and insights of IPV practitioners in Canada and the United States on supervision and trauma-informed practice using simulation as a research methodology. The research questions guiding this study are: What aspects of supervision do IPV practitioners understand to be most supportive of their are trauma-informed practice with survivors of IPV?

Methods: Eighteen IPV practitioners were recruited for the study and shared best practices for trauma-informed supervision. Each participant engaged in a 30-minute online simulated session with a live standardized patient (SP) who portrayed a survivor of IPV experiencing sequelae of trauma. Following each simulation, participants engaged in 30-45 minutes of reflective dialogue on their experiences and perspectives of trauma-informed supervision and their feedback on the use of simulation. Reflections were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim and data was analyzed using reflective thematic analysis.

Findings: Findings illustrate three key elements IPV providers find crucial to the delivery of trauma-informed supervision in IPV practice: 1) accessible and consistent supervisors; 2) supervision focused on attending to impacts of trauma on the practitioner and the client, and; 3) simulation as a supervision training tool. IPV practitioners stressed the need for ongoing trauma-informed supervision in which supervisees are able to share their concerns, brainstorm strategies, and reflect on their practice. Findings also signal the expectation that providers believe their supervisors should be well trained in trauma-informed practice, which is an important consideration. Participants also appreciated the use of simulation as a teaching and supervisory tool particularly suited to facilitating feedback and encouraging reflective practice.

Conclusions: Implications for social work research and practice will be described, including the need for further research that examines the utility of simulation and supervision, and that explores the possibility of creating a model for training practitioners in trauma-informed practice to prepare them for working with clients who have experienced IPV. This study also signals the creative possibilities that simulation may offer for training supervisors to more effectively support supervisees in trauma-informed practice.