Gross anatomy practical examinations have traditionally been composed of primarily free-response identification questions. Because student learning and study habits are influenced by testing, it is important that curricular design and objectives are reflected in all types of assessments, including those that take place in a laboratory setting. The use of higher-order and discipline-integrated questions on gross anatomy practical examinations reinforces the importance that anatomy knowledge has in clinical reasoning and assesses students’ ability to apply foundational information from an early point in their medical career. In this study, gross anatomy practical examinations were analyzed to assess the impact that higher-order and discipline-integrated testing modalities have on various measures of student performance. Two years of examinations (N = 338 questions) were reviewed and categorized by question type, Bloom’s taxonomy and discipline. Difficulty, discrimination index (DI) and point-biserial correlations were calculated for each question. These statistics were then compared between categories using Kruskal-Wallis tests with post-hoc pairwise comparisons (Dunn’s method). Results demonstrate that higher-order and discipline-integrated questions were significantly more difficult than traditional identification questions and tended to have higher mean DIs and point-biserials. Questions that targeted higher Bloom’s taxonomic levels were also found to be more difficult. This study demonstrates that integrated examinations can be incorporated into the gross anatomy laboratory, but suggests that this be done carefully as these changes can impact student performance.