AzTrials
AzTrials

Healthy StudentsNCT07267832

Impact of Health Promotion Service-Learning for Older Adults in Physiotherapy Students

A study testing health promotion through Service-Learning and Health Promotion through Traditional Learning in people with Healthy Students, run by University of Valencia at 1 site in Spain.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Currently, there is a lack of evidence regarding the impact of service-learning methodology (SL) on learning-related outcomes for physiotherapy students, specifically when designing and implementing health promotion programs for vulnerable older adults. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Healthy Students
What is being tested?
health promotion through Service-Learning and Health Promotion through Traditional Learning
Type of treatment
Pill or oral medicine
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
83 participants
Where
1 siteSpain
Study dates
3 Mar 2022to 17 Apr 2022
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 Any age
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • To be studying the Physiotherapy Degree in the Faculty of Physiotherapy of the University of Valencia.
  • Willingness to participate

Who cannot join

  • previous Service-Learning training

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Spain1 site
  • Department of Physiotherapy. Faculty of Physiotherapy. University of Valencia

    Valencia, Valencia, 46010

Other trials in Spain

About this study

Currently, there is a lack of evidence regarding the impact of service-learning methodology (SL) on learning-related outcomes for physiotherapy students, specifically when designing and implementing health promotion programs for vulnerable older adults. The present study aims to compare the effects of an SL program versus a Traditional Learning (TL) approach on Basic Psychological Needs (BPN), motivation, academic engagement, and empathy in physiotherapy students.

This study is a randomized clinical trial. Eighty-three physiotherapy students are allocated to an SL group (SLG) or to a TL group (TLG). All students develop a health promotion and therapeutic exercise program for vulnerable older adults, in order to carry out prevention and health promotion activities. The SLG performs the program with real patients by visiting health centers, while the TLG does not meet real patients. BPN, motivation, academic engagement, and empathy, in their different dimensions, are evaluated pre- and post-intervention.

This study was registered retrospectively, as the recruitment and/or data collection had already started before registration.

Read the detailed description

Health science professionals require both technical and interpersonal competencies to provide effective, patient-centered care. In physiotherapy, developing communication skills, empathy, and ethical awareness is essential for addressing patients' needs and situations of vulnerability. However, these interpersonal competencies are often insufficiently emphasized in traditional university curricula.

Service-Learning (SL) emerges as an innovative educational methodology that integrates academic learning with community service, allowing students to apply theoretical knowledge to real social contexts. Through direct engagement with community needs, SL promotes experiential learning, civic responsibility, and the development of transversal competencies such as empathy, communication, and teamwork. Aligned with the principles of the Self-Determination Theory, SL fosters the satisfaction of basic psychological needs-competence, autonomy, relatedness, and novelty-enhancing students' motivation and engagement.

Previous studies in health sciences suggest that SL improves academic performance, moral development, and self-determined motivation. In physiotherapy, it contributes to the acquisition of professional and interpersonal skills necessary for effective clinical practice. Nevertheless, there is limited evidence on the impact of SL when physiotherapy students design and implement health promotion programs for vulnerable older adults. Investigating this approach is therefore essential to understanding its potential to enhance learning outcomes and foster socially committed future professionals.

A randomized, assessor-blinded trial compares a Service-Learning (SL) intervention with a Traditional Learning (TL) approach in physiotherapy students. Eighty-three students from the University of Valencia (Spain) are randomly assigned to either the SL group (SLG, n=39) or the TL group (TLG, n=44).

The SL intervention follows six domains: (Domain 1) project introduction and formation of student groups; (Domain 2) identification of the physical, functional, and social needs of vulnerable older adults through direct contact and literature review; (Domain 3) discussion and validation of identified needs with mentor supervision; (Domain 4) autonomous individual work; (Domain 5) collaborative group work; and (Domain 6) final presentation in a clinical setting, including practical implementation with older adults and interactive discussion. Throughout all domains, students engage in guided critical reflection on the personal, professional, and social implications of their participation in the SL program.

The TL intervention consists of a parallel six-domain structure but without direct engagement with older adults: (Domain 1) project introduction and group formation; (Domain 2) identification of needs solely through bibliographic research; (Domain 3) review and discussion of findings with teacher supervision; (Domain 4) autonomous individual work; (Domain 5) collaborative group work; and (Domain 6) final oral presentation of the proposed health promotion program to peers at the university.

This study was registered retrospectively, as the recruitment and/or data collection had already started before registration.

Being tested
health promotion through Service-Learning, Health Promotion through Traditional Learning
Keywords
service-learning, physiotherapy, health promotion, teaching-learning methodology

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • health promotion through Service-LearningOther

    Students of the Service-Learning Group (SLG) put their plans into practice by directly interacting with older adults in health centers, allowing them to observe needs firsthand and apply interventions in real-life contexts.

  • Health Promotion through Traditional LearningOther

    Students in the Traditional Learning Group (TLG) develop their programs based solely on literature and research, without direct contact with patients. They analyze the needs of older adults through bibliographic sources, discuss their findings with the instructor, and integrate both individual and group work into their process. The TLG finalizes their project by presenting the proposed program to classmates, using examples to illustrate its application.

Study groups in NCT07267832
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Service-Learning groupExperimentalStudents work in groups to identify the needs of vulnerable older adults, researching and validating them with a mentor, combining individual and collaborative work, and culminating in the presentation and implementation of a health intervention, all accompanied by critical reflection on their personal and professional learning.
Receives: Other: health promotion through Service-Learning
Traditional Learning groupActive comparatorStudents in the TL group follow a similar structure but do not engage directly with older adults. They identify needs solely through bibliographic research, review and discuss their findings with the teacher, and combine individual and group work. The intervention concludes with an oral presentation of the proposed health program to peers, illustrating it with examples.
Receives: Other: Health Promotion through Traditional Learning

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Basic Psychological Needs

    The fulfillment of Basic Psychological Needs is measured using the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSNF), which evaluates the extent to which individuals experience satisfaction or frustration regarding four fundamental psychological needs: autonomy, competence, relatedness, and novelty. For each need, participants respond to items assessing both satisfaction and frustration on a 5-point Likert scale, where higher scores indicate greater satisfaction or greater frustration, respectively.

    Measured: baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention

Secondary outcomes (3)
  1. Motivation

    Motivation is assessed using the Scale of Motivation in Education, which includes 28 items across seven dimensions: Intrinsic Motivation - Knowledge, Intrinsic Motivation - Achievement, Intrinsic Motivation - Stimulating Experiences, Identified Regulation, Introjected Regulation, External Regulation, and Amotivation. Participants respond on a 7-point Likert scale, where 1 indicates "totally disagree" and 7 "totally agree." Higher scores in the first five dimensions indicate greater self-determined motivation, while higher scores in External Regulation and Amotivation reflect less self-determined forms of motivation.

    Measured: baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention

  2. Academic engagement

    This outcome is measured using the short Spanish version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, Student (UWES-S-9), an instrument described for analyzing engagement and widely used. This instrument measures three dimensions of academic engagement: vigor, dedication, and absorption. The scale consists of nine items in total, with three items corresponding to each dimension. Responses are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always/every day). Higher scores indicate greater levels of academic engagement in each dimension.

    Measured: baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention

  3. Empathy

    Empathy is evaluated using the Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE), a 20-item instrument scored on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). This scale is specifically designed to evaluate empathy within the context of patient care. It comprises three domains: (1) Empathic concern, which captures emotional sensitivity and concern for the patient's well-being; (2) Perspective taking, which reflects the ability to understand and consider the patient's viewpoint; and (3) Standing in the patient's shoes, which assesses the capacity to maintain appropriate emotional distance while still grasping the patient's experience. Higher scores across domains correspond to greater levels of empathy.

    Measured: baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted5 Dec 2025
  2. Study start3 Mar 2022
  3. Primary completion17 Apr 2022
  4. Study completion17 Apr 2022

Resources

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
Model description
Randomized controlled trial
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
83 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07267832
Sponsor's protocol ID
CEISH/47/2022
Status last verified
Dec 2025
First submitted
17 Nov 2025
Last updated
15 Dec 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing health promotion through Service-Learning and Health Promotion through Traditional Learning in people with Healthy Students, run by University of Valencia at 1 site in Spain.

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 2 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 15 Dec 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Spain. 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?

Basic Psychological Needs (time frame: baseline (pre-intervention) and immediately after the intervention). 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 15 Dec 2025.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in