Abstract

Anatomy teaching has traditionally been based on dissection. However, alternative teaching modalities constantly emerge, the use of which along with a decrease in teaching hours has brought the anatomy knowledge of students and young doctors into question. In this way, the goal of the present study is to a. compare the efficacy of the most common teaching modalities and b. investigate students’ perceptions on each modality. In total, 313 medical students were taught gross anatomy of the upper limb, using four different learning modalities: dissection (n = 80), prosections (n = 77), plastic models (n = 84) and 3D anatomy software (n = 72). Students’ knowledge was examined by 100 multiple-choice and tag questions followed by an evaluation questionnaire. Regarding performance, the dissection and the 3D group outperformed the prosection and the plastic models group in total and multiple-choice questions. The performance of the 3D group in tag questions was also statistically significantly higher compared to the other three groups. In the evaluation questionnaire, dissection outperformed the rest three modalities in questions assessing students’ satisfaction, but also fear or stress before the laboratory. Moreover, dissection and 3D software were considered more useful when preparing for clinical activities. In conclusion, dissection remains first in students’ preferences and achieves higher knowledge acquisition. Contemporary, 3D anatomy software are considered equally important when preparing for clinical activities and mainly favor spatial knowledge acquisition. Prosections could be a valuable alternative when dissection is unavailable due to limited time or shortage of cadavers. Plastic models are less effective in knowledge acquisition but could be valuable when preparing for cadaveric laboratories. In conclusion, the targeted use of each learning modality is essential for a modern medical curriculum.

Highlights

  • Anatomy teaching has traditionally been based on dissection

  • There are no other studies comparing 3D software to dissection, Hisley et al examined another 3D visualization t­echnology[33]. They reported superiority of 3D MRI–CT compared to dissection, in questions examining spatial knowledge acquisition, their sample was again small. These results comply with the findings of the present study, since in tag questions, students of the 3D group performed significantly better compared to those of the dissection group, highlighting once again the importance of isolation and 360° view of each structure provided by contemporary 3D software

  • The conclusion of this article aims to put each modality in the right educational context and promote the appropriate and targeted use of all four modalities in anatomy teaching and learning

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Alternative teaching modalities constantly emerge, the use of which along with a decrease in teaching hours has brought the anatomy knowledge of students and young doctors into question. In this way, the goal of the present study is to a. 313 medical students were taught gross anatomy of the upper limb, using four different learning modalities: dissection (n = 80), prosections (n = 77), plastic models (n = 84) and 3D anatomy software (n = 72). Despite the development of all the above teaching modalities, anatomy knowledge in medical students and young doctors is considered i­nsufficient[12,13,14,15,16]. Considering that in the U.K. there was a sevenfold increase in claims associated with anatomical errors submitted to the Medical Defense Union and that some out of 80,000 avoidable deaths in the U.S could be attributed to anatomical incompetence, ameliorating anatomy education is ­crucial[13,19,20]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call