Healthy VolunteerNCT05686291
Effectiveness of Hybrid Learning Mode of Volunteer Training
A study testing Hybrid volunteer training programme in people with Healthy Volunteer, run by Education University of Hong Kong at 2 sites in Hong Kong.
Trial summary
As the effectiveness of the hybrid volunteer training in Hong Kong is under-studied, this experimental study aims to develop a hybrid learning mode of volunteer training that increase volunteering-related self-efficacy and its associated outcomes among volunteer. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy Volunteer
- What is being tested?
- Hybrid volunteer training programme
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 64 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesHong Kong
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2022to 31 Dec 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Hong Kong residents
- Age ≥18 years
- Willing to participate in volunteer service
- Being able to read Chinese
- Have a computer, tablet and/or smartphone device with Internet access
- Have a regular email address
- Willing to give informed consent and comply with the trial protocol
Who cannot join
- Unable to communicate with Cantonese.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
Hong Kong2 sites
Baptist Oi Kwan Social Service
Hong Kong, 999077
The Education University of Hong Kong
Hong Kong, 999077
About this study
Official title: Effectiveness of Hybrid Learning Mode of Volunteer Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial
As the effectiveness of the hybrid volunteer training in Hong Kong is under-studied, this experimental study aims to develop a hybrid learning mode of volunteer training that increase volunteering-related self-efficacy and its associated outcomes among volunteer. In particular, this study compares the efficacy of hybrid volunteer training with the wait-list control group.
The volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses. Each module will consist of the key volunteer training component presented in in written or video format. Materials will be presented interactively to facilitate engagement.
Read the detailed description
Mental illness poses a challenge to public mental health services because of its high prevalence, symptom chronicity, and impacts on patients and society. Although there is a huge amount of need to serve people with mental illness, there is insufficient manpower. There is much empirical evidence to support the volunteer programs for people with mental illness. However, the literature on hybrid volunteer training is mainly focused on teaching and learning in education, and the effectiveness of the hybrid volunteer training in Hong Kong is under-studied. Therefore, The present study aims to compare the efficacy of hybrid volunteer training with the wait-list control group. We hypothesize that (1) participants who receive hybrid volunteer training will increase their self-efficacy of volunteering after the intervention as compared with the wait-list controls; (2) participants from hybrid volunteer training will have better mental health knowledge and less mental health-related stigmatized beliefs and behavior after the intervention as compared with the wait-list controls.
The volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses, incorporating the key volunteer training components, including Keyes theory, bio-psycho-social model, stress bucket model, recovery model and CHIME model. Each module will consist of the key volunteer training component presented in in written or video format. Materials will be presented interactively to facilitate engagement.
- Conditions
- Healthy Volunteer
- Being tested
- Hybrid volunteer training programme
- Keywords
- Volunteer training, Hybrid learning mode, Mental illness
- Medical subject headings
- Mental Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Hybrid volunteer training programmeBehavioural
The volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses, incorporating the key volunteer training components, including Keyes theory, bio-psycho-social model, stress bucket model, recovery model and CHIME model.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment group | Experimental | Participants in the treatment condition start the online volunteer training immediately after randomization and completed the online module within 2-week. Then they are invited to attend the face-to-face training within 1-week. They will complete the post-intervention assessment right after they finish the face-to-face training, and be invited to participate in an interview. Receives: Behavioral: Hybrid volunteer training programme |
| Wait-list control group | No intervention | Participants in the waitlist control group will wait for 4 weeks without the training and then complete the post-intervention assessment. The waitlist control participants will start training (equivalent to that of the treatment group) immediately after completing the post-intervention assessment. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change from Baseline Assessment in Self-Efficacy Towards Service on the Self-Efficacy Towards Service (SETS) Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The SETS scale assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Measured: Before intervention, Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Mental Health-related Knowledge on the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The MAKS assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Views of Empowerment on the Empowerment Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The Empowerment Scale assess the change in a 9-point scale of agreement, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (9).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in View of Recovery on the Recovery Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The Recovery Scale assess the change in a 9-point scale of agreement, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (9).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Mental Health-related Behaviors on the Intended Behaviour subscale of the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The RIBS assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to engage in the stated behavior (1) to strongly agree with engaging in the stated behavior (5).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Public Attitudes Toward Mental Illness on the Stigma and Acceptance Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The Stigma and Acceptance Scale assess the change in a 6-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Secondary outcomes (4)
Change from Baseline Assessment in Psychological Wellbeing on the World Health Organisation-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The WHO-5 assess the change in a 6-point Likert scale, ranging from at no time (1) to all of the time (6).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Anxiety Symptom on the General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The GAD-7 assess the change in a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from not at all (0) to nearly every day (3).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Depressive Symptom on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The PHQ-9 assess the change in a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from not at all (0) to nearly every day (3).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Quality of Life on the Twelve-item short-form (SF-12) health survey at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
The SF-12 assesses the change in a combination of 5-point and 3-point Likert scale, ranging respectively from poor/ never (1) to excellent/ very much (5), and never (1) to very much (3).
Measured: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Jan 2023
- Study start1 Aug 2022
- Primary completion1 Dec 2023
- Study completion31 Dec 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Healthy VolunteerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Education University of Hong Kong
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Baptist Oi Kwan Social Service
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, CHAN Ka Shing Kevin, Education University of Hong Kong
- Investigators
- Kevin, Ka Shing CHAN, Principal investigator, The Education University of Hong Kong
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05686291
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2021-2022-0403
- Status last verified
- Feb 2024
- First submitted
- 6 Jan 2023
- Last updated
- 28 Feb 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Feb 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effectiveness of Hybrid Learning Mode of Volunteer Training: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05686291
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2021-2022-0403
- Conditions
- Healthy Volunteer
- Keywords
- Volunteer training, Hybrid learning mode, Mental illness
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 64 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Education University of Hong KongUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Baptist Oi Kwan Social Service
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
As the effectiveness of the hybrid volunteer training in Hong Kong is under-studied, this experimental study aims to develop a hybrid learning mode of volunteer training that increase volunteering-related self-efficacy and its associated outcomes among volunteer. In particular, this study compares the efficacy of hybrid volunteer training with the wait-list control group.
The volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses. Each module will consist of the key volunteer training component presented in in written or video format. Materials will be presented interactively to facilitate engagement.
Detailed description
Mental illness poses a challenge to public mental health services because of its high prevalence, symptom chronicity, and impacts on patients and society. Although there is a huge amount of need to serve people with mental illness, there is insufficient manpower. There is much empirical evidence to support the volunteer programs for people with mental illness. However, the literature on hybrid volunteer training is mainly focused on teaching and learning in education, and the effectiveness of the hybrid volunteer training in Hong Kong is under-studied. Therefore, The present study aims to compare the efficacy of hybrid volunteer training with the wait-list control group. We hypothesize that (1) participants who receive hybrid volunteer training will increase their self-efficacy of volunteering after the intervention as compared with the wait-list controls; (2) participants from hybrid volunteer training will have better mental health knowledge and less mental health-related stigmatized beliefs and behavior after the intervention as compared with the wait-list controls.
The volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses, incorporating the key volunteer training components, including Keyes theory, bio-psycho-social model, stress bucket model, recovery model and CHIME model. Each module will consist of the key volunteer training component presented in in written or video format. Materials will be presented interactively to facilitate engagement.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment group | Experimental | Behavioral: Hybrid volunteer training programmeParticipants in the treatment condition start the online volunteer training immediately after randomization and completed the online module within 2-week. Then they are invited to attend the face-to-face training within 1-week. They will complete the post-intervention assessment right after they finish the face-to-face training, and be invited to participate in an interview. |
| Wait-list control group | No intervention | –Participants in the waitlist control group will wait for 4 weeks without the training and then complete the post-intervention assessment. The waitlist control participants will start training (equivalent to that of the treatment group) immediately after completing the post-intervention assessment. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Hong Kong residents
- Age ≥18 years
- Willing to participate in volunteer service
- Being able to read Chinese
- Have a computer, tablet and/or smartphone device with Internet access
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Unable to communicate with Cantonese.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Hybrid volunteer training programmeThe volunteer training will consist of a 6-module online course, followed by 5 face-to-face courses, incorporating the key volunteer training components, including Keyes theory, bio-psycho-social model, stress bucket model, recovery model and CHIME model. | Behavioural | Treatment group |
Primary outcome
Change from Baseline Assessment in Self-Efficacy Towards Service on the Self-Efficacy Towards Service (SETS) Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention, Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The SETS scale assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Change from Baseline Assessment in Mental Health-related Knowledge on the Mental Health Knowledge Schedule (MAKS) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The MAKS assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
Change from Baseline Assessment in Views of Empowerment on the Empowerment Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The Empowerment Scale assess the change in a 9-point scale of agreement, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (9).
Change from Baseline Assessment in View of Recovery on the Recovery Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The Recovery Scale assess the change in a 9-point scale of agreement, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (9).
Change from Baseline Assessment in Mental Health-related Behaviors on the Intended Behaviour subscale of the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The RIBS assess the change in a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree to engage in the stated behavior (1) to strongly agree with engaging in the stated behavior (5).
Change from Baseline Assessment in Public Attitudes Toward Mental Illness on the Stigma and Acceptance Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
The Stigma and Acceptance Scale assess the change in a 6-point Likert scale, ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (6).
4 secondary outcomes
Change from Baseline Assessment in Psychological Wellbeing on the World Health Organisation-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Anxiety Symptom on the General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Depressive Symptom on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Change from Baseline Assessment in Quality of Life on the Twelve-item short-form (SF-12) health survey at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment
Time frame: Before intervention and Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Feb 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Healthy Volunteer
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Establishment of Biobank of Nasal Epithelium Samples From Healthy Volunteers
Healthy
RecruitingObservational study
Improved Methods of Cell Selection for Bone Marrow Transplant Alternatives
Graft-Versus-Host Disease, Graft-versus-leukemia
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Screening Protocol
Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Kevin, Ka Shing CHAN principal investigator
The Education University of Hong Kong
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Hybrid volunteer training programme in people with Healthy Volunteer, run by Education University of Hong Kong at 2 sites in Hong Kong.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Feb 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change from Baseline Assessment in Self-Efficacy Towards Service on the Self-Efficacy Towards Service (SETS) Scale at Post-intervention Assessment and Follow-up Assessment (time frame: Before intervention, Immediately after intervention, and 4 weeks after intervention). The study lists 6 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Feb 2024.