Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affects the education of medical students around the world and countries have had differing responses in dealing with this dynamic situation. The role of medical students in fighting this pandemic is controversial and it is yet to be elucidated how they can best be of service. The aim of this study is to evaluate the working fields of volunteering students and the impact of the pandemic on final year students from a student's perspective. Methods: An anonymous online survey was conducted amongst 219 medical students from Hamburg (Germany), using an institutional online data collection program. Results: A total of 137 questionnaires (63.5%) were completed. Of these, 97 participants were students from academic year three to five (70.8%) and 40 students were in the final year of medical school (29.2%). Of the 97 students from academic year three to five, 68 students (70.1%) signed up for voluntary duties during the pandemic. Interestingly, only 25.0% of the students were called for voluntary work in hospitals or health authorities. Final year students had already been working in hospitals since before the outbreak, with 35.0% of them assisting doctors in the treatment of COVID-19 positive patients during their placements. Using a 5-Point Likert Scale, the students who volunteered self-assessed their work as more useful and received more gratitude than final year students (p<0.01). Conclusions: The majority of medical students are willing to make a significant contribution in the response to COVID-19 and do not wish to be overlooked. Furthermore, the current pandemic offers novel educational opportunities for medical students.

Background Student-Run Free Clinics (SRFCs) have been an integral part of US medical schools since the 1960s and provide health care to underserved populations. In 2018, we established an SRFC in Hamburg, Germany, a major city in Northern Europe. The aim of this study was to describe the central problems and to investigate the usefulness of an SRFC in a country with free access to medical care, such as Germany. Methods All consecutive patients treated at the SRFC Hamburg between February 2018 and March 2019 that consented to this study were analyzed regarding clinical characteristics, diagnosis, readmission rate and country of origin. Results Between February 2018 and March 2019, 229 patients were treated at the SRFC in Hamburg. The patients came from 33 different countries with a majority (n = 206, 90%) from countries inside the European Union. The most common reasons for visiting the SRFC were infections (23.2%), acute or chronic wounds (13.5%) and fractures (6.3%). Conclusion Our multicultural patients suffer mainly from infections and traumatological and dermatological diseases. We find similarities to published Canadian SRFC patient cohorts but differences in diseases and treatment modalities compared to US SRFCs. Importantly, we demonstrate the relevance and necessity of the SRFC in a major city in Northern Europe.

No abstract