Evaluation of a vaccination seminar in regard to medical students' attitudes and their theoretical and practical vaccination-specific competencies.

Despite having a generally positive attitude toward vaccinations, medical students show gaps in their own immunization histories and knowledge about vaccinations. Future practicing physicians will be confronted with the need to evaluate protective immunity and make vaccination recommendations. This study aims to investigate the extent to which a seminar on the topic of vaccination can improve students' attitudes, knowledge and practical skills in interpreting vaccination certificates. Two different one-hour seminars were developed and integrated into the required clinical curriculum. A third of the students attended a theory-based seminar; the other two-thirds completed a predominantly practice-based seminar. The theoretical seminar consisted of a lecture on the principles and theoretical aspects of immunization. In the practical seminar, the curricular content was case-based and taught using fictive examples of vaccination certificates. Before the seminar was held, a voluntary and anonymous survey of the students was conducted regarding their attitudes toward and knowledge of immunization. At the conclusion of the seminar, the students' ability to understand vaccination certificates was tested. After completing the seminar, all of the participants received a link to participate in a voluntary online survey to evaluate the seminar. Of the 149 seminar attendees in the 2017/18 winter semester, 148 participated in the study. Students have a positive attitude toward vaccinations. Regardless of the type of seminar attended, the agreement with statements on vaccination could be significantly increased primarily among students who already at the start of the seminar expressed a high degree of agreement. Students vaccinated against influenza showed significantly stronger agreement than unvaccinated students. Regardless of teaching format, students' knowledge about vaccination topics could be increased. For those vaccinated against influenza, the mean value for agreement with the statement, saw an increase on a five-point Likert scale from 3.97 to 4.4 (p<0.001; R=0.67). For the unvaccinated students, the mean value rose from 4.04 to 4.19 (p=0.06; R=0.29). The students who attended the theory-based seminar tended to score higher on interpreting vaccination certificates than those who attended the practical seminar; however, this difference was not statistically significant. The online evaluation was completed by 18% of the participants. The theoretical seminar received the grade of 2.9 based on the conventional German academic grading scale; the practical seminar received 1.9. This difference is statistically significant (p=0.02). Precisely for skeptical students it was only possible to minimally change existing views with a seminar that offers very brief instruction. Attendees of the theoretical seminar tended to score somewhat higher on interpreting vaccination certificates than those who took the practical seminar. The practical seminar was rated significantly better on the course evaluation than the theoretical one. The advantage that the students attending the theoretical seminar had can be explained best by the structured review of the current vaccination recommendations as part of the seminar, which should, as a consequence, be integrated into the practical seminar.