Medical and dental student knowledge about COVID-19 and influenza vaccines impact opinions about vaccine advocacy and future practice.

Introduction: The World Health Organization has identified vaccine hesitancy as a global public health challenge. Healthcare providers are among the most influential and trusted figures for vaccine counseling. This article focuses on COVID-19 and influenza personal immunization behaviors, vaccine knowledge and opinions, and vaccine counseling confidence among future healthcare providers - dental and medical students. Methods: A cross-sectional anonymous online survey was conducted at four dental schools and one allopathic medical school in the United States. Items included personal vaccination status for the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines and vaccine-specific items developed based on past research to assess knowledge, opinions, and behaviors. Results: Two hundred and thirty-two medical and 221 dental students completed the survey. 68 and 55% scored average/above-average knowledge on COVID-19 and influenza vaccine items, respectively. There were significant differences between those with average/above-average and below-average knowledge scores regarding learning about, recommending, and advocating for vaccines and counseling vaccine-hesitant patients for both vaccines (p < 0.0001). Although higher-knowledge students had higher vaccination rates (p < 0.0001), many had insufficient knowledge about vaccines. Discussion: Healthcare providers play a crucial role in vaccine advocacy. The identified knowledge gaps are significant as they impact quality of patient care. And opinions about future vaccination practice such as recommending, providing, and counseling about vaccines. Equipping students with knowledge and communication skills will enable them to be strong vaccine advocates to improve overall public health.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy among dental and medical students.

BACKGROUND: Dental students (DS) and medical students (MS) are exposed to COVID-19. It is important to achieve high COVID-19 vaccination coverage rates in both of these groups. The authors developed a survey to assess COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among MS and DS. METHODS: The authors conducted the study at 3 US dental schools and 1 US medical school using an online survey that assessed previous immunization behavior, attitudes about and perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines, and personal experience with COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 248 DS and 167 MS completed the survey. Forty-five percent of DS and 23% of MS were hesitant about receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Results of bivariate analyses found that MS were 2.7 times more likely than DS to receive the vaccine (odds ratio, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.76 to 4.31; P = .0001). Although DS were more likely than MS (P < .05) to have had COVID-19 and to personally know someone who had COVID-19, MS were more likely to agree with mandates and trust information about the vaccines. In multivariable analyses, after controlling for demographic variables, experience with COVID-19, and personal vaccination behaviors, being a MS or DS was no longer predictive of willingness to get the vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the need for profession-specific curricula designed to enhance student knowledge about the vaccines and vaccine counseling skills. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The American Dental Association supports dentists administering vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccines. Dentists and DS should be willing to receive the vaccines themselves. Education about the vaccines is needed to improve uptake.

Dental students' attitudes and hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Dentists are a group of providers who have been identified by CDC at high risk of exposure to COVID-19 through their contact with patients. This would apply to dental students as well. Thus, it is important to achieve high COVID-19 vaccination rates in this group. Further, as healthcare providers, they are entrusted with providing health recommendations and advocating for their patients, community, and profession, including vaccinations. METHODS: Using ualtricsXM an online platform, in 2020, a survey was administered anonymously to dental students at three dental schools to assess the attitudes of dental students to the novel COVID-19 vaccine. Factors and reasons associated with vaccine hesitancy and acceptance toward the COVID-19 vaccine and likelihood of recommending and giving the vaccination to patients were assessed. RESULTS: Nearly, all participants had positive attitudes toward vaccines in general, agreed they would likely be exposed to COVID-19, and personally knew someone who had COVID-19; however, only 56% are willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as an FDA-approved vaccine was available. Of those unwilling to take the vaccine, 63% reported they would take it if mandated by the health systems/dental school; however, 16.3% of the overall respondents would not take the COVID-19 vaccine even if mandated. Several factors are associated with vaccine acceptance and the likelihood of recommending the vaccination, such as trusting public health experts, concerns about side effects, and agreeing with vaccine mandates. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the need for an educational curriculum about the safety and effectiveness to promote the uptake of COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among medical students.

BACKGROUND: Medical students are among the group of frontline healthcare providers likely to be exposed to COVID-19 patients. It is important to achieve high COVID-19 vaccination coverage rates in this group as soon as a vaccine is available. As future healthcare providers, they will be entrusted with providing vaccine recommendations and counseling vaccine-hesitant patients. METHODS: This project used self-report to assess vaccine hesitancy and acceptance among medical students towards the novel COVID-19 vaccine. RESULTS: Nearly all participants had positive attitudes towards vaccines and agreed they would likely be exposed to COVID-19; however, only 53% indicated they would participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial and 23% were unwilling to take a COVID-19 vaccine immediately upon FDA approval. Students willing to immediately take the vaccine were more likely to trust public health experts, have fewer concerns about side effects and agree with vaccine mandates (P < 0.05). Concern for serious side effects was independently predictive of lower odds of intent to participate in a COVID-19 vaccine trial (AOR = 0.41, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among US medical students and highlights the need for an educational curriculum about the safety and effectiveness to promote uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine.

Will they lead by example? Assessment of vaccination rates and attitudes to human papilloma virus in millennial medical students.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States. It is also well established that HPV viruses are responsible for a variety of cancers. Little is known about the prevailing knowledge and attitudes toward the HPV vaccine in our future healthcare providers, a majority of whom were among the first in the target age group to receive the vaccine; the same vaccine that they will in turn be expected to recommend to their patients. The aims of this pilot study were to examine the HPV vaccination rate among medical students and determine their knowledge about HPV and attitudes toward vaccination. METHODS: To aid in the development of an HPV educational intervention, a needs assessment survey was administered to discover medical students' knowledge and attitudes toward the HPV vaccine. All medical students at a Midwestern US medical school were invited to complete the survey. RESULTS: Two hundred fourteen of 390 medical students completed the survey with 44% having been previously vaccinated. Although 82% of all respondents believed they would recommend the vaccine to family and friends, only 40% felt knowledgeable about the vaccine and 40% felt comfortable counseling patients. More positive attitudes and better knowledge scores were found in fully vaccinated students compared to non-vaccinated students. Provider recommendation was strongly associated with HPV vaccination status. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed the unique perspectives of U.S. millennial medical students as the first group of future healthcare providers to have personally encountered the HPV vaccine. Overall, students' knowledge as well as their comfort level in counseling patients was lacking. This assessment has guided the development of targeted educational interventions to address knowledge gaps and prepare students to appropriately discuss the vaccine with patients and parents and help protect young people from life threatening cancers.

An Assessment of Needs of Church Coordinators Providing Meals to a Homeless Shelter.

Charitable meal services are crucial in sustaining the homeless, but few use nutritional professionals to create a balanced diet or make adjustments for those with specific dietary needs. A needs assessment was conducted among church coordinators responsible for providing meals to clients at a multi-service shelter in Detroit, Michigan. A survey and focus group were used to assess the processes involved in planning, preparing, and providing meals, which provided critical information and insight concerning nutrition and factors influencing meal-planning. According to the survey, a majority of faith organizations responding tried to meet food group requirements every meal. A predominant theme from the focus group was the desire to satisfy clients resulting in a variety and abundance of food enabling poor choices. The provision of healthy options was constrained by efforts to ease meal preparation, desire to provide comfort foods, and having difficulties accommodating diets related to health problems.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment among high-risk patients: Does a combined intervention targeting patients and providers work?

BACKGROUND: Physicians are aware of the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines; however, most patients fail to attain cholesterol goals. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a combined program of patient education and provider awareness could improve the National Cholesterol Education Program goal attainment among patients at high risk for cardiovascular events. METHODS: One hundred seven high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease were educated in a single 15-minute session regarding their cholesterol levels, risk factors, and medication adherence. Those with scores of 2 or lower on the Morisky questionnaire were classified as low-adherence patients, and those with scores of 3 or higher were classified as high-adherence patients. Seven physicians were provided this information and were requested to evaluate the dyslipidemia management of these patients. Lipid levels were reevaluated 8 to 12 weeks after the intervention. RESULTS: At the start of the study, 38 (35.5%) of the 107 patients were at target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, and 64 of the 107 patients (59.8%) were at target levels after the intervention. High-adherence patients decreased their LDL-C levels from a mean of 118.6 mg/dL (3.07 mmol/L) to 98.6 mg/dL (2.55 mmol/L); low-adherence patients increased their LDL-C levels after the intervention from 134.5 mg/dL (3.48 mmol/L) to 142.1 mg/dL (3.68 mmol/L). A comparison between the LDL-C goal achievers vs nonachievers revealed a significant difference in adherence (P = .001). Among the goal achievers, significant decreases in preintervention vs postintervention total cholesterol levels (P = .001) and LDL-C levels (P = .001) were also noted. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that an intervention simultaneously targeting patients and providers is successful in improving goal attainment among high-risk patients.

Hypothesized predictors of patient-physician trust and distrust in the elderly: implications for health and disease management.

This study notes the differences between trust and distrust perceptions by the elderly as compared with younger populations. Given the importance of trust and distrust in compliance, changing behaviors, and forming partnerships for both health and disease management, it is necessary to be able to measure patient-doctor trust and distrust (PDTD). Following recent conceptualizations on trust and distrust as coexistent states, this study hypothesizes predictors of PDTD. We are proposing that these predictors form the basis for designing, developing and validating a PDTD scale (PDTDS). It is important to capture the trust-distrust perceptions of older patients as they confront the complexities and vulnerabilities of the modem healthcare delivery system. This is necessary if we are to design interventions to change behaviors of both the healthcare provider and the older patient.

Are anonymous evaluations a better assessment of faculty teaching performance? A comparative analysis of open and anonymous evaluation processes.

OBJECTIVE: We compared teaching performance of medical school faculty using anonymous evaluations and open evaluations (in which the evaluator was not anonymous) and examined barriers to open evaluation. METHODS: Residents and medical students evaluated faculty using an open evaluation instrument in which their identity was indicated in the evaluation. Following this, they completed anonymous evaluation on the same faculty members. Aggregate outcomes using the two evaluation systems were compared. Outcomes by group of evaluators (residents and students) were analyzed. Trainees were also asked to rate the barriers to the open evaluation process. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference between the open and anonymous evaluations was noted across all items, with faculty receiving lower scores on the anonymous evaluations. The mean score for all the items on the open evaluations was 4.45 +/- 0.65, compared to mean score of 4.07 +/- 0.80 on the anonymous evaluations. There was also a statistically significant difference between open and anonymous evaluations in five clinical teaching domains that were evaluated individually. Residents perceived that the three most common barriers to optimal evaluation were an apprehension of possible encounters with the same attending physician in the future, destruction of working relationships with the attending, and a feeling of frustration with the evaluation system. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of faculty teaching performance is complex. Most academic medical centers use the open evaluation format. This study supports the case for the use of the anonymous evaluation method as a more accurate reflection of teaching performance.