Please note the ANZCTR will be unattended from Friday 20 December 2019 for the holidays. The Registry will re-open on Tuesday 07 January 2020. Submissions and updates will not be processed during that time.

Please be advised that as the ANZCTR is funded by Australia and New Zealand, we must prioritise submissions from these countries first. International submissions should allow additional time for registration. Apologies for any inconvenience caused.

The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this information for consumers
Trial registered on ANZCTR


Registration number
ACTRN12618000455268
Ethics application status
Approved
Date submitted
6/03/2018
Date registered
29/03/2018
Date last updated
29/03/2018
Type of registration
Retrospectively registered

Titles & IDs
Public title
Exploring the value of peer mentoring on the psychosocial wellbeing of junior doctors: a qualitative randomised controlled study
Scientific title
Exploring the value of peer mentoring on the psychosocial wellbeing of junior doctors: a qualitative randomised controlled study
Secondary ID [1] 294264 0
none
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Trial acronym
Linked study record

Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Depression 306946 0
Anxiety 307164 0
Condition category
Condition code
Mental Health 306045 306045 0 0
Depression
Mental Health 306220 306220 0 0
Anxiety

Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Provision of peer mentoring to new interns in a tertiary Australian hospital

Mentoring was provided to new interns by PGY 2 or 3 doctors that had volunteered and been selected as appropriate mentors.
The mentors were provided with information packs and escalation strategies but did not receive specific training.
Mentors were paired 1:1 with mentees and provided informal mentoring over the course of one year (the intern year).
The location, mode of delivery, frequency of meetings or content of meetings was not dictated to the mentors or mentees but left to each individual pairing to determine what was best.
No measures of adherence were collected.
Intervention code [1] 300555 0
Prevention
Comparator / control treatment
No mentoring was provided to the control group of interns - standard support was provided to these interns.
The postgraduate medical education department can arrange formal and informal psychological support for interns if the intern reports any mental health concerns. However, these were not peer mentors but administrative supports.
Control group
Active

Outcomes
Primary outcome [1] 305070 0
Individual interviews and focus groups were held with participating interns and mentors.
The details of these were analysed using qualitative methodology to determine the perception of the effectiveness of peer support on anxiety and depression.
Timepoint [1] 305070 0
1 year post enrollment - end of intern year
Secondary outcome [1] 344083 0
Demand for mentoring was assessed by measuring the number of interns that at the start of their intern year requested to participate in the programme as a proprtion of the total number of interns.
As this programme was run in a single hospital this was assessed using the hospital employment records.
Timepoint [1] 344083 0
At time of enrollment - start of intern year

Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
All interns were eligible to participate
Minimum age
18 Years
Maximum age
No limit
Gender
Both males and females
Can healthy volunteers participate?
Yes
Key exclusion criteria
Unwilling to participate

Study design
Purpose of the study
Prevention
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Allocation was concealed as the participants were not randomised until after all had been registered - all participants were centrally randomised by computer
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Simple, using computer software
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Who is / are masked / blinded?



Intervention assignment
Parallel
Other design features
Phase
Not Applicable
Type of endpoint(s)
Efficacy
Statistical methods / analysis
Qualitative analysis - inductive and thematic analysis

Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Actual
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Actual
Sample size
Target
Accrual to date
Final
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
WA
Recruitment hospital [1] 10319 0
Royal Perth Hospital - Perth
Recruitment postcode(s) [1] 21987 0
6000 - Perth

Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1] 298901 0
Hospital
Name [1] 298901 0
Royal Perth Hospital
Address [1] 298901 0
Wellington St
Perth
WA 6000
Country [1] 298901 0
Australia
Primary sponsor type
Hospital
Name
Royal Perth Hospital
Address
Wellington St
Perth
WA 6000
Country
Australia
Secondary sponsor category [1] 298116 0
None
Name [1] 298116 0
Address [1] 298116 0
Country [1] 298116 0

Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Approved
Ethics committee name [1] 299844 0
Royal Perth Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee
Ethics committee address [1] 299844 0
Royal Perth Hospital
Wellington St
Perth
WA 6000
Ethics committee country [1] 299844 0
Australia
Date submitted for ethics approval [1] 299844 0
Approval date [1] 299844 0
03/11/2014
Ethics approval number [1] 299844 0
HREC 14-086

Summary
Brief summary
Objective
To evaluate the impact of a peer mentoring program for newly qualified interns on psychological wellbeing, and assess the demand for such a program within an Australian hospital setting.
Design, Setting and Participants
Through a randomised controlled study, interns in a tertiary teaching hospital (Perth, Western Australia) were recruited to be mentees and resident junior doctors were selected to be mentors.
Methods and Main Outcome Measure
Interns were randomised 1:1 to receive, or not to receive, a mentor. Mentors were recruited. Qualitative outcome data was collected using semi-structured interviews and focus groups at 12 months and used to assess psychosocial wellbeing and job satisfaction.
Results
Fifty-three interns applied to participate in the program. Twenty-six mentor-mentee pairs were matched. Twenty-seven interns were allocated to not receive a mentor. Through iterative data analysis, the overarching themes concluded the value of the program in aiding navigation through the complex healthcare system while enhancing a sense of community. Participants with mentors reported high satisfaction with a positive impact on stress levels, morale, sense of support, job satisfaction, and psychosocial wellbeing.
Conclusion
A peer mentoring program enhances junior doctor support structures, builds a sense of community and helps interns navigate their new professional environment. To our knowledge, this is the first research of its kind involving Australian prevocational junior doctors and provides a feasibility model that may be adapted regionally or nationally.
Trial website
Trial related presentations / publications
None
Public notes

Contacts
Principal investigator
Name 81746 0
Dr Sonia Chanchlani
Address 81746 0
Clinical Services
Royal Perth Hospital
Wellington St
Perth WA 6000
Country 81746 0
Australia
Phone 81746 0
+61430917410
Fax 81746 0
Email 81746 0
soniachanchlani@gmail.com
Contact person for public queries
Name 81747 0
Dr Sonia Chanchlani
Address 81747 0
Clinical Services
Royal Perth Hospital
Wellington St
Perth WA 6000
Country 81747 0
Australia
Phone 81747 0
+61430917410
Fax 81747 0
Email 81747 0
soniachanchlani@gmail.com
Contact person for scientific queries
Name 81748 0
Dr Sonia Chanchlani
Address 81748 0
Clinical Services
Royal Perth Hospital
Wellington St
Perth WA 6000
Country 81748 0
Australia
Phone 81748 0
+61430917410
Fax 81748 0
Email 81748 0
soniachanchlani@gmail.com

No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
Summary results
Have study results been published in a peer-reviewed journal?
Other publications
Have study results been made publicly available in another format?
Results – basic reporting
Results – plain English summary