Benefits of combined quantitative and qualitative evaluation of learning experience in a gerodontology course for dental students.

OBJECTIVES: The oral health status of long-term care (LTC) facility residents is often poor, and acceptance of dental services by the elderly is irregular and mostly problem-driven. The perceived knowledge gap due to insufficient under- or postgraduate education and training in gerodontology might present a barrier for dentists to provide domiciliary care. This study aimed to develop a high-quality student course in gerodontology. METHODS: A total of 52 undergraduate dental students (age: 23.4 ± 2.1 yrs., 81% female) participated in a novel one-year gerodontology course and were included in this prospective study. The course was organized over two semesters, comprising two consecutive modules (one theoretical and one practical). The evaluation after the first semester applied a 16-item questionnaire with an ordinal 6-point response scale ranging from "not satisfied at all" (0) to "very satisfied" (5) for quantitative evaluation, and free-text comments as the qualitative part. These qualitative findings were used for validating the satisfaction questionnaire by triangulation, and to identify potential issues for improving the course. Satisfaction scores of the second evaluation after 1 year were used to assess potential effects of course modifications by comparing the participant satisfaction scores between both evaluations. RESULTS: Satisfaction scores of 3.6 ± 0.7 after the first semester indicated students' initial satisfaction. The lowest satisfaction was observed for timeframe (2.6 ± 1.3) and interdisciplinary education (3.0 ± 1.4). The qualitative evaluation confirmed not only the ratings but also provided potential explanations, which were addressed by modifying the course accordingly. The effect of the modifications on participant evaluation was reflected by substantially improved satisfaction scores at the second assessment in 14 of 16 items, with a significant increase in overall satisfaction from 3.6 ± 0.7 to 4.0 ± 0.4 (p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: A combined quantitative and qualitative evaluation is a successful method for developing, evaluating, and improving a gerodontology course for dental students with high student satisfaction.

[Mentoring for medical students : Description and evaluation of a differentiated mentoring program at a medical school]. / Mentoring für Studierende in der Medizin : Darstellung und Evaluation eines differenzierten Mentoringprogramms an einer medizinischen Fakultät.

In recent years, mentoring programs for medical students have been increasingly implemented in medical schools in Germany. This article describes a voluntary mentoring program for students, which is differentiated into a common mentoring program (AP), a mentoring program for excellent students (EP) and a mentoring plus program (PP) for students with academic difficulties, and its evaluation.The evaluation is based on annual evaluation surveys among the participating mentees, who evaluate the mentoring relationship as well as the impact on their studies.The three student groups differ significantly with regard to sociodemographic variables. The satisfaction with the mentoring program is generally high: 84-94% are mentored by their preferred mentor, the majority assesses the conversational atmosphere as open (78-91%), and 89-98% would recommend participation in the program to others. The programs differ with regard to specific aspects. While PP mentees report the highest ratings on the mentor's accessibility, trustworthiness and feedback, EP mentees report the highest ratings on the mentor's competence as well as increased identification with the faculty and early career promotion through the mentoring program.The different assessments of the three programs as well as the generally high acceptance and satisfaction ratings indicate that such a differentiated mentoring program provides a framework of individual support, which is highly appreciated by most students.

Understanding Mental Burden and Factors Associated With Study Worries Among Undergraduate Medical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is affecting many areas of life and has led to major changes in undergraduate medical education. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, high mental burden of medical students has frequently been reported in the literature. Additional pandemic-specific stressors could exacerbate this situation. This study aimed to assess mental health outcomes among medical students during the first semester after the COVID-19 outbreak and perception of the students on how the learning environment has changed. In May 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among undergraduate medical students at a large medical school in Germany. The survey included validated mental health instruments (Distress Thermometer, Patient Health Questionnaire 4) and self-developed items to examine the perception of the study situation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Open-ended questions were analyzed by conventional content analyses. The response rate was 59.2% (914/1,545). Overall, 61.9% of the students reported distress levels above the cutoff. Year 1 students reported significantly higher levels of distress, anxiety and depression than students during their second to fourth year of studies. 48.3% of the students indicated a decrease in their study motivation since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic with significant differences between study years. The binary logistic regression model showed that male gender, being in study year 2, higher distress scores and higher symptoms of depression were significantly associated with a higher likelihood for experiencing serious worries. In the open-ended questions on current concerns related to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their studies, students most frequently reported concerns about missing relevant practical learning experience, difficulties with self-regulated learning and self motivation as well as study-related worries. Year 4 students reported significantly more worries about the lack of practical training than students from study years 1 to 3. Analysis of gender differences showed that female students reported more frequently diverse worries. In contrast, female students shared more frequently helpful strategies in all the categories compared to male students. Our findings suggest that medical students experience significant levels of distress and mental burden during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight the need for ongoing psychological and educational support for medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic and after.

Mental burden and perception of the study situation among undergraduate students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study and comparison of dental and medical students.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate levels of distress, depression, anxiety, stress and perception of their current study situation during the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate dental and medical students. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional study including two consecutive surveys (May and July 2020). SETTING: A large medical school in Germany. PARTICIPANTS: All first year dental and medical students were invited. 132 participating first year students (44 dental, 88 medical) from the first survey and 150 students (50 dental, 100 medical) from the second were included in our analyses. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Mental burden (distress thermometer, Patient Health Questionnaire-4, Perceived Stress Scale-4) and self-reported changes in mental health and perception of study situation during the COVID-19 pandemic (self-developed items) were compared. Open-ended questions were analysed by conventional content analyses. RESULTS: A considerable proportion of students (t1: May 2020: 84.1%; t2: July 2020: 77.3%) reported distress levels above cut-off. In July 2020, dental students reported significantly higher distress scores than medical students (dental: M=7.0, SD=2.3; medical: M=5.7; SD=2.1; p<0.001). More dental than medical students reported mild, moderate and severe levels of anxiety and depression symptoms. The majority stated that their mental health and study motivation had not changed during the pandemic. Logistic regression showed that being a dental student was significantly associated with a higher likelihood for serious worries regarding the study situation during COVID-19 at t1 (OR 4.0; 95% CI 1.1 to 14.2). At t2 higher distress was significantly associated with a higher likelihood for experiencing serious worries (OR 1.8; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.5). Regarding current concerns related to the pandemic, students most frequently reported difficulties with self-regulated learning (15.2%), study-related worries and uncertainty (14.4%), missing feedback of students and lecturers (11.4%) and lack of practical training (9.8%). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that high mental burden and the lack of practical training among medical and dental students is an increasing problem, with a possibly even higher urgency in dental students. Tailored psychological and educational support offers during and after the COVID-19 pandemic might help them as they progress through (medical and) dental school.

Perception of the study situation and mental burden during the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students with and without mentoring.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic changes in medical education and might affect students' mental health and perception of study conditions. Mentoring may have mediating effects by enhancing social support. The University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE) offers a voluntary general mentoring program (g-mentoring) for all interested students and a mentoring program for students with excellent course results and scientific interest (e-mentoring) We aimed to investigate the mental burden and views of their study situation during COVID-19 among students who did or did not participate in one of the formal mentoring programs. Method: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey (May 2020) examining students' mental burden using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), and assessing their perception of study conditions and digital teaching using self-developed items. Results: Of 1193 invited students, 543 (45.5%) completed the survey. 35% of those participated in the g-mentoring and 7% in the e-mentoring. 59% did not participate in any program. More e-mentees than g-mentees and nonparticipants reported clinically unproblematic levels of anxiety and depression symptoms. The majority of students (55%) was somewhat worried about the impact of the pandemic on their study situation. Regarding digital teaching students did not feel overburdened by the lack of a fixed schedule and structure, e-mentees even less than g-mentees and nonparticipants. Both g-mentees and nonparticipants were significantly more appreciative of the possible repeated use of the digital teaching materials than e-mentees (both groups M=5.7 vs. M=5.4 in e-mentees, p=.045). Conclusion: The results indicate that while students feel substantially burdened by the situation and the majority worries about the impact of the pandemic on their studies, they also seem to cope well with the digital course format. Study motivation during COVID-19 decreased among the majority of students with and without mentoring. These aspects may be important to address by medical schools interested in developing effective interventions to support students during a pandemic and continuous online teaching.

Effects of Mentoring Speed Dating as an Innovative Matching Tool in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Mixed Methods Study.

OBJECTIVES: Choosing the right mentor is crucial for effective mentorship. Yet, many medical students have difficulties finding a suitable mentor. Thus we developed mentoring speed dating (MSD) as a promising matching tool to connect students and faculty mentors successfully. The purpose of this study was to explore mentees' and mentors' experience with MSD and investigate the impact of MSD on the perceived mentorship quality and continuance of the mentoring relationship. METHODS: The authors completed a mixed methods study at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany, between June 2011 and March 2014. They conducted four focus groups with mentees and mentors who participated in a mentoring speed dating event and analyzed transcripts using conventional content analysis with inductive categorizing. In addition, three mentoring cohorts (two matched via MSD, one matched via conventional online profiles) were surveyed on mentorship satisfaction and the 1-year continuance of their mentorship was monitored. Fifteen mentees and fifteen mentors participated in the focus groups. The authors identified several themes such as short and long term benefits of MSD and fulfillment of expectations. Benefits included finding out about the personal connection, matching expectations, providing an efficient overview of candidates. The survey was completed by 93 students (n = 29 without MSD; n = 64 with MSD). Independent t-tests and multivariate analysis of variance were used to analyze the impact of MSD on student's mentorship satisfaction. RESULTS: There were significant differences in responses to the items "Commitment of mentor" (p = .019) and "Constructive feedback" (p = .038) among the students who attended MSD and the students without MSD. After one year far more mentoring relationships existed among those mentees who participated in MSD in comparison to the "no MSD group". CONCLUSION: MSD is a valuable matching tool with beneficial effects on the mentorship quality. It enhances essential factors in the mentoring relationship such as commitment and satisfaction.