Integrating a Microbiology Laboratory Improves the Attitudes and Performance of First-Year Osteopathic Medical Students

Microbiology is a vital component of preclinical education for allopathic and osteopathic medical schools. However, many medical students did not complete a microbiology course in previous undergraduate or graduate programs, making this their first introduction to the subject. Additionally, microbiology content in many medical schools is typically not supplemented by laboratory coursework, which would provide a hands-on learning modality. The goal of this project was to examine whether incorporating a microbiology laboratory activity into the first-year osteopathic medical curriculum results in altered attitudes toward and/or performance in microbiology. In Spring 2024 (n = 28) and Spring 2025 (n = 22), first-year osteopathic medical students (OMS1, n = 50) engaged in a two-session microbiology laboratory activity. This activity covered colony isolation, differential and selective media, Gram staining, catalase testing, and, in the case of the Spring 2025 section, antibiotic sensitivity. Students completed surveys comprised of multiple-choice knowledge questions and Likert scale opinion questions, both before and after the laboratory exercise. Paired t-tests were used to examine changes in responses from the presurvey to the postsurvey. Student performance on multiple-choice questions improved after completing the laboratory activity (for all participants, n = 50; p < 0.0001). Of these 50 students, 44 students' individual performance improved, with only five students having no change in performance and one student performing worse. Regardless of whether students had taken a microbiology course or previously worked in a laboratory, performance improved (took microbiology, n = 27; p < 0.0001, did not take microbiology, n = 23; p < 0.0001, worked in a lab, n = 27; p < 0.0001, did not work in a lab, n = 22, p < 0.0001). As determined by unpaired t-tests, course readings completed between the two laboratory sessions did not influence postsurvey multiple-choice scores. Based on paired t-tests for all participants, student ratings significantly increased from the presurvey to the postsurvey for questions 1 (I enjoy microbiology; p < 0.0001; mean score improved from 5.20/7 to 5.92/7), 3 (I am confident about my knowledge of microbiology techniques; p < 0.0001; mean score improved from 3.32/7 to 4.90/7), 4 (I am confident that I understand how a sample obtained from a patient with a bacterial infection may be tested; p < 0.0001; mean score improved from 4.10/7 to 5.82/7), and 5 (I enjoy doing microbiology lab work; p < 0.0001; mean score improved from 4.70/7 to 6.32/7). In summary, independent of students' microbiology course experience or laboratory work experience, incorporation of a laboratory activity in the OMS1 curriculum provides a short-term improvement in student microbiology knowledge and increases positive sentiments toward laboratory work and microbiology. More opportunities should be taken to implement hands-on exercises in microbiology where possible within the medical curriculum. This work joins a limited but promising body of literature examining laboratory activities alongside medical coursework. Future studies should examine long-term content retention and attitudes several weeks or months after laboratory activities, as well as different modalities of administration (visual, verbal, etc.) for supplementary content.