Skip to content

Online Intervention for ANHPI College Students

Social and Behavioral Interventions to Increase Solid Organ Donation

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02318849
Acronym
iDecide
Enrollment
4827
Registered
2014-12-17
Start date
2014-11-01
Completion date
2018-12-31
Last updated
2024-02-05

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Tissue and Organ Procurement

Keywords

designated organ donor, college students

Brief summary

Taking advantage of college students' frequent use of online technology, including social networking sites (e.g., Instagram a social media site /Facebook a social networking site) and social media sites (e.g., YouTube), the investigators will create an online intervention that leverages this technology to engage and educate Asian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islanders (ANHPI)students about a range of topics related to organ donation following death.

Detailed description

Over 56% of the 120,000 critically ill Americans waiting on transplant waiting lists are ethnic minorities. The proportion of ethnic minorities, including Asian, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islanders (ANHPI), on waiting lists exceeds their representation in the general population. However, few ANHPI adults are designated organ donors (DOD) on their driver's licenses or in a donor registry. ANHPI college students (aged 18-29) also have low DOD rates, particularly Filipinos. Individuals are typically asked about becoming a DOD when renewing a driver's license; but most never think about OD outside of the short-lived Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) transaction. Knowing someone's status as a DOD on their license can be an influential factor in solidifying a family's feelings about donating a relative's organs after his/her death, if their consent is necessary. Of those who choose DOD status on a license, most will remain one for life. Intervening with drivers before the date of their license renewal can be difficult to arrange; however, opportunities arise when college students turn 21 and want to renew their license in order to remove formatting / colors signifying that the license belongs to an underage minor (\< 21 years old). Taking advantage of college students' frequent use of online technology, including social networking sites (e.g., Instagram a social media site /Facebook a social networking site) and social media sites (e.g., YouTube), the investigators created an online intervention that leveraged this technology to engage and educate ANHPI students about a range of topics related to organ donation (OD). It will also provide culturally sensitive messages tailored to their interest in or wariness of organ donation and reframe students' attitudes about OD and becoming a DOD. Previous internet interventions to encourage college students to become DODs have not included culturally sensitive approaches for ANHPI, who have unique barriers to OD. The cross-sectional design will test the impact of introducing, sequentially, an online intervention tailored to college students at three universities (UH-Manoa, UH-Hilo, and Hawaii Pacific University). The sequence of when the a university received the intervention was randomly determined; thus, the study's design was a cross-sectional design. The goal was to increase DOD rates in college students, particularly ANHPI and encouraging peer discussions/interactions/advocacy about OD. Effectiveness will be measured by a change over time in the percentage of students who report being a DOD on their license/donor registry (250 students per university measured across 6 time points; thus, the total sample = 4,500). The investigators anticipate a 12% increase in DOD rate in students who are exposed to the intervention. Increases in DOD status will also be tracked via an increase (over normal rates) in the number of new donors aged 18-29 who register as a donor on Hawaii's online donor registry. To make the study website relevant to college students the investigators will include resources useful for assignments in courses (e.g., both in required general education courses- including one on writing skills, and courses on ethics, religion, sociology, and culture/ ethnic studies, etc.) Students and student organizations will participate in contests to win prizes (e.g., for the best 1-minute DOD focused-YouTube video/ Instagram picture, creating a caption for a photo on Instagram, and student organizations who compete for group awards). A goal of the intervention will be to reframe OD by engaging altruistic attitudes based on college students' commitment to green sustainability efforts (e.g., go green, recycle yourself). Innovative culturally sensitive strategies that can engage, educate, and reframe DOD for college students, including those who find it unappealing (i.e., the ick factor) are clearly needed. The online intervention will saturate online venues (i.e., YouTube, Instagram) visited frequently by college students, and the investigators will use the new concept of gamification to turn college students' learning and advocacy ideas surrounding OD/DOD into a game or contest with their peers. This project builds upon Drs. Albright and Feeley's (consultant - Univ. of Buffalo, Dept. of Communications) previous work to encourage adolescents and young adults to become a DOD; thus, the investigators feel well-suited to design, implement, and evaluate the proposed project. The intervention will increase DOD rates in ANHPI students, and thus, increase the number of ethnic minorities who become deceased organ donors now and for years to come.

Interventions

interactive website using social media and gamification

Sponsors

Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
CollaboratorFED
University of Hawaii
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Masking description

Students did not know the schedule for rolling out the intervention by university.

Intervention model description

Online educational intervention of choice to be an organ donor was provided to undergraduate students at three universities. The intervention launch at the universities were sequentially initiated, in random order. The design included cross-sectional assessments (unique respondents at each site over time ) as well as longitudinal assessments (same students repeatedly assessed over time).

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Must be registered undergraduate student at University of Hawaii at Manoa, University of Hawaii at Hilo, or Hawaii Pacific University * Must be over the age of 18yrs

Exclusion criteria

* Not an undergraduate college student at one of the participating university sites

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Donor Status2 yearsnumber of subjects who are designated organ donor on license
Talk to Peers/Family2 yearsnumber of subjects who report talking to family or peers about choice be organ donor

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Cross-sectional samples of undergraduate students were recruited for every survey; thus, numbers that completed a baseline or a post-treatment survey differed by site. Surveys prior to the intervention served as baseline data and surveys after initiation served as intervention results. For example, one site (UHM -Manoa) received only one baseline survey; but 6 post-intervention surveys.Thus, it had small baseline sample; but, large post-test sample.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
First Initiation Site
University randomized to receive intervention after 1 baseline assessment. Duration of intervention was 3 semesters. This was University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM).
1,483
Second Initiation Site
University randomized to receive intervention after 3 baseline assessment. Duration of intervention was 2 semesters. This was University of Hawaii at Hilo (UHH).
1,412
Third Initiation Site
University randomized to receive intervention after 5 baseline assessment. Duration of intervention was 2 semesters. This was Hawaii Pacific University (HPU).
1,932
Total4,827

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicFirst Initiation SiteTotalThird Initiation SiteSecond Initiation Site
Age, Continuous21.78 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.37
22.43 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.57
22.68 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.27
22.77 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.36
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
161 Participants684 Participants306 Participants217 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
1313 Participants4075 Participants1597 Participants1165 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
9 Participants68 Participants29 Participants30 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
38 Participants187 Participants79 Participants70 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
757 Participants1786 Participants671 Participants358 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
21 Participants128 Participants82 Participants25 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
169 Participants467 Participants146 Participants152 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
206 Participants779 Participants199 Participants374 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
28 Participants146 Participants73 Participants45 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
264 Participants1334 Participants682 Participants388 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
1483 Participants4827 Participants1932 Participants1412 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
1120 Participants3627 Participants1578 Participants929 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
363 Participants1200 Participants354 Participants483 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 1,4830 / 1,4120 / 1,932
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 1,4830 / 1,4120 / 1,932
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 1,4830 / 1,4120 / 1,932

Outcome results

Primary

Donor Status

number of subjects who are designated organ donor on license

Time frame: 2 years

Population: Undergraduate students who completed surveys.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
First Initiation SiteDonor Status748 Participants
Second Initiation SiteDonor Status715 Participants
Third Initiation SiteDonor Status1030 Participants
Comparison: The null hypothesis was that the of number students who report being a donor (or talking to parents about organ donation) both before and after exposure to the intervention would be equivalent. A secondary null hypothesis would be that longer expsosures to the intervention over time would not increase the number who report becoming a donor at the final assessment.p-value: 0.009Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

Talk to Peers/Family

number of subjects who report talking to family or peers about choice be organ donor

Time frame: 2 years

Population: Undergraduate students who completed surveys.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
First Initiation SiteTalk to Peers/Family555 Participants
Second Initiation SiteTalk to Peers/Family563 Participants
Third Initiation SiteTalk to Peers/Family846 Participants
p-value: >0.1Mixed Models Analysis

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026