Evaluating Three‐dimensional (3D) Digital Models of Anatomical Variations as Assessment Tools for Undergraduate and Graduate Anatomy Education

Abstract

IntroductionFor medical and allied health students, knowledge of anatomical variation is important as it may influence physical examination, diagnosis and treatment of patients. Recent studies indicate anatomical variation should be conceptually integrated early into the anatomy curriculum prior to the discipline specific variations taught in surgical and radiological postgraduate training programs. For academic institutions with limited access to cadaveric dissection and anatomy museums, the opportunity for students to appreciate the range of normality in anatomical structures is diminished. Thus, the purpose of this study was to demonstrate how 3D models of anatomical variations may be used to assess structure, function and spatial relationships by incorporating the concept of anatomical variations into assessment paradigms.MethodsTwo 3D digital models depicting upper limb muscular variations, and a 3D teratological model were evaluated by undergraduate kinesiology (KIN) (n = 30), and graduate clinical anatomy (CA) (n = 10) students. The study protocol consisted of the following instruments introduced in sequence: (1) 30‐question Spatial Ability Test (SAT), (2) 16‐question baseline upper limb anatomy test, (3) 13‐question multiple choice quiz based on the displayed 3D models, and (4) Student perception survey (5‐point Likert scale). Based on SAT scores, a median split was used stratify the students into high (KIN: 15, CA: 5) and low spatial ability (KIN: 15, CA: 5). All data are presented as Mean ± SD.ResultsBoth student groups scored similarly on the baseline anatomy knowledge test (KIN: 71 ± 17 %, CA: 71 ± 12%). The mean 3D model quiz scores for KIN students of high spatial ability were 72 ± 16% compared to those of lower spatial ability, 68 ± 14%. The 3D model quiz scores for CA students of high spatial ability were 88 ± 12% compared to CA students of lower spatial ability, 77 ± 15%. The models were perceived as useful in assessing spatial relationships (KIN: 4.4 ± 0.8, CA: 4.9 ± 0.3) and clinical concepts (KIN: 4.0 ± 0.9 CA: 3.9 ± 0.3). Student perceptions were positive for integrating the 3D models into lecture, or laboratory discussions, but KIN students were relatively neutral (3.2 ± 1.2) compared to CA students (3.9 ± 0.3) in their integrated use in bell‐ringer style laboratory assessments. The students expressed interest for a database of explorable 3D models of anatomical variations.ConclusionIntegration of the 3D variant models into anatomy curricula could be a useful means in assessing fundamental anatomical concepts, while demonstrating how deviations in structure can affect normal function. For institutions with computer access but limited cadaveric resources, the 3D models could be powerful supplementary teaching and assessment tools for anatomy students of all education levels and spatial abilities. Furthermore, development of a database of explorable anatomical variations for teaching and learning purposes would be valuable for allied health and medical programs in search of integrating variant anatomy into their anatomy curricula.Support or Funding InformationSupported by: American Association of Anatomists (AAA) Education Research Scholarship; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.