An Investigative Approach to Anatomical Dissection Enhances Self‐Directed Learning and Clinical Relevance

Abstract

BackgroundMedical school faculty are obliged to ensure that students understand the scientific method and have opportunities to collect, analyze and synthesize information. To achieve this set of foundational learning experiences, instructors from multiple departments have collaborated (since 2014) to augment traditional dissection a) by facilitating the collection of student‐determined tissue biopsies, b) by assisting students document their gross normative and pathologic observations, and c) by advising them with the analysis and presentation of their findings.DescriptionDuring a nine‐week anatomy course, each dissection team (n = 35 teams) obtained approximately seven biopsies from their assigned body donor, which were processed to microscopic slides for the teams to examine. By choosing what organs to biopsy, the teams determined their own learning objectives. At the end of the course, student teams prepared written summaries of their findings and gave oral presentations at an intramural biomedical research conference.ResultsA satisfaction survey was conducted (157 out of 174 students) following the 2018 human structure (anatomy) course to find which aspects of this project the students found worthwhile. Using a 5‐point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree), the mean values and standard deviations (Mean ± SD) were calculated for different facets of the autopsy‐style approach and the institution‐provided resources to determine student approval. Students highly valued the investigative approach (4.64 ± 0.58) and enjoyed determining a hypothesized cause of death (4.68 ± 0.53). Consultation with pathology faculty improved the experience (4.59 ± 0.59) and understanding of disease processes (4.46 ± 0.59). By utilizing histologic evidence not found from gross anatomical observations (4.53 ± 0.66), they were able to integrate both (4.68 ± 0.49) into theoretical diagnoses. Collaborating as a professional team (4.58 ± 0.64), the students effectively presented their work (4.63 ± 0.58) in a realistic conference setting (4.51 ± 0.61). Several open‐ended comments in the survey suggested that the members of some teams were dissatisfied with the distribution of workload and uneven participation by team members. Overall, the students recommended the continuation of this investigative method (4.74 ± 0.48).DiscussionThe contributions of numerous faculty and staff were essential to make this labor‐intensive project possible and successful. Student‐survey results suggested the investigative approach to clinical gross anatomy was popular and effective. Faculty observed that this experience firmly grounded the learning of anatomy, histology and pathology within a clinical context. It strongly motivated students to develop and/or explore individual interests. Furthermore, it helped build rapport between students and faculty in the earliest weeks of their pre‐clerkship education, and simultaneously created a setting for pathology residents to mature in their role of potential educators and for students to consider pathology as a career option.Support or Funding InformationArkansas Medical Society and two UAMS Departments: a) Neurobiology and Developmental Sciences, b) PathologyThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.