Role Of Dissection Research Articles

Medical Faculty Perspectives Toward Cadaveric Dissection as a Learning Tool for Anatomy Education: A Survey Study in India.

Cadaveric dissection, as a learning tool, has been a part of Indian medical education. Worldwide, with reforms in medical education and the introduction of new learning modalities, cadaveric dissection has been complemented with other modalities such as living anatomy and virtual anatomy. This study aims to collect the feedback of faculty members regarding the role of dissection in the present context of medical education. The method of the study involved a 32-item questionnaire to collect responses; they were collected using the 5-point Likert scale along with two open-ended questions. In general, the closed questions covered these sections: learning styles, interpersonal skills, teaching and learning, dissection, and other learning modes. The principal component analysis was used to explore the multivariate relationships among the items' perceptions. The multivariate regression analysis was conducted between the construct and the latent variable to develop the structural equation model. Four themes, PC1 (learning ability with structural orientation), PC2 (interpersonal skill), PC3 (multimedia-virtual tool), and PC5 (associated factors) had positive relation and were treated as a latent variable motivation for dissection, and theme 4 (PC4, safety) had a negative correlation and was treated as a latent variable repulsion for dissection. It was found that the dissection room is an important place for learning clinical and personal skills, along with empathy, in anatomy education. Safety issues and implementation of stress-coping activities during the induction phase are required. There is also a need to use mixed-method approaches that integratetechnology-enhanced learning such as virtual anatomy, living anatomy, and radiologicalanatomy with cadaveric dissection.

Latin American Anatomists’ views on human body dissection and donation

BackgroundStudies abound regarding the medical students' views on the importance of anatomy and the dissection of human bodies, but little is known about the views of Latin American Anatomists. MethodsA survey was carried out to test several hypotheses among anatomists of the Americas about how they perceive their professional identity, the use and role of dissection in their undergraduate courses, and the approval degree of bequeathing their body for anatomical teaching/research; another goal was ascertaining to what extent their attitude on these topics depended on gender, length of teaching experience and belief in the afterlife. ResultsOne hundred and forty-five anatomists from thirteen Latin American and Caribbean Countries took the survey; 79% stated the main role of an anatomist is teaching; 34% recorded their undergraduate students dissected human cadavers as part of their anatomy lab course—undergraduates dissecting less in the less experienced anatomists’ courses (p = 0.0002). Most anatomists said dissection was a training tool for undergraduate students, a tool for developing professional skills, and a tool to help control emotions—most experienced anatomists stood out from the rest saying dissection is only to teach anatomy (p < 0.001), even if such response was the least valued by them among all replies. Men differed from women in valuing dissection as a tool to help control emotions (p = 0.006); less experienced anatomists held the opposite (p < 0.0001). Approval of a close doctor-patient relationship diverged, being different between the most and the least experienced anatomists (p = 0.01). Anatomists said they would donate only their organs (44%), whole body (9%) and both organs and body (46%). Undecided anatomists about the belief in life after death were the least in favor of donation (p = 0.05).

Importance of Cadaveric Dissection in Learning Anatomy For Medical Students: A Review

Cadaveric dissection has been used for centuries to explore anatomy. The role of dissection in modern medical curricula has been a topic of intense debate. Anatomical education has been undergoing reforms in line with the demands of medical profession. Despite the rise of modern technology and evolved teaching methods, dissection continues to remain a cornerstone of the anatomy curriculum. Dissection helps to build discipline independent skills which are essential requirements of modern healthcare setup. Its utility is also reflected in the perception of students who believe that dissection provides them a foundation to develop clinical skills. Objections to the use of cadavers had led to other alternatives including virtual dissection of computer models. The current state of dissection in anatomy is deteriorating. Present study aims to assess the importance of traditional method like cadaveric dissection in teaching and learning anatomy at the present time when medical schools are inclining towards integrated and clinical application of learning methods.

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Oncological Resections with Vascular Surgeons Improves Patient Outcomes

Oncological resections have become more radical in pursuit of disease free margins. Consequently, vascular structures may be injured inadvertently or purposely resected, with or without subsequent reconstruction. Thus, vascular surgeons have an increasing role in oncological surgery. The present authors sought to review their experience and examine the effect of timing of referral to a Vascular Surgeon (VS) on patient and surgical outcomes following tumour resection. A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively maintained database at a public hospital network in Adelaide, Australia. All cases of collaboration between a VS and other surgeons for resection of cancer or non-malignant tumour were included. Medical records and operative, pathological, and transfusion data were reviewed, with particular attention to referring team, timing of VS referral (pre- or intra-operative), and the operative role of the VS. Seventy-two cases were identified from January 2004 to June 2018. The most common collaborators were General Surgery and Urology. Of the cases, 86% were elective and 71% were referred to the VS pre-operatively. Pre-operative referral was associated with a predominant VS role of dissection and exposure. Pre-operative referral was associated with lower odds of vessel repair and reconstruction compared with intra-operative referral (adjusted OR=0.20; 95% CI 0.04-0.93; p=.040) and a lower incidence of positive surgical margins (35% vs. 80%, p=.028). The rate of blood product units required was lower among pre-operative referrals relative to intra-operative referrals, but the effect of timing was not significant after adjustment for potential confounders (IRR=0.80, 95% CI 0.26-2.44; p=.70). Pre-operative planned involvement of vascular surgery in oncological operations can improve surgical outcomes, with additional expected benefits for surgical training and cross specialty collaboration.

Tumour content ratio matters for detecting epidermal growth factor receptor mutation by cobas test in small biopsies; a retrospective study

BackgroundRecent studies indicate the benefit of treatment with osimertinib over that with conventional epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for untreated EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Cobas ver2 is the only companion diagnostic method for detecting EGFR mutations with osimertinib treatment. We clinically experience false negative cases with this test, but its actual sensitivity is unknown. Moreover, no study has suggested the importance of tumour dissection, and most facilities do not routinely perform them on small biopsies. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity of cobas in clinical practice and clarify the role of dissection as a component of the cobas testing.MethodsWe examined 132 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC diagnosed by bronchoscopy and confirmed with PCR clamp. Patients were tested with cobas and the EGFR-positive rate was calculated. Samples with undetected EGFR mutations were retested after tumour dissection and the rate of samples whose EGFR mutation was corrected to positive was assessed. To evaluate tumour cellularity, the tumour content ratio was assessed by calculating tumour cell count over the total cell count on the slide.ResultsThe positive rate of EGFR mutation identification was 76% with cobas, although EGFR mutation-negative patients retained responses to TKI therapy equivalent to positive patients did; however, the tumour content ratio of negative samples was significantly lower than that of positive samples. Twenty-nine negative samples underwent dissection and 24% were corrected to positive. Moreover, 53% of the samples with a tumour content ratio below 10% was negative for cobas, but 33% of these turned positive after dissection.ConclusionsCobas had a high false negative rate in clinical practice, and tumour content ratio might be associated with this rate. Dissection could improve the sensitivity of cobas, especially in samples with low tumour cellularity.

Dissection in the Modern Medical Curriculum: An Exploration into Student Perception and Adaptions for the Future.

For centuries cadaveric dissection has been a cornerstone of medical anatomy education. However, time and financial limitations in modern, compressed medical curricula, coupled with the abundance of alternate modalities, have raised questions about the role of dissection. This study was designed to explore student perceptions of the efficacy of a dissection program for learning musculoskeletal anatomy, and possible adaptations for appropriate inclusion of dissection in the modern medical curricula. A paper-based questionnaire was used to collect data from 174 medical students after completion of cadaveric dissections. Data were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Students strongly believed that cadaver-based learning is essential to anatomy education and modern teaching modalities only complement this. Moreover, most students reported that dissection provided an additional, immersive learning experience that facilitated active learning and helped in developing manual competencies. Students with previous dissection experience or an interest in anatomy-related specialties were significantly more likely to attend dissection sessions. Students found that the procedural dissection components enhanced the knowledge of applied anatomy and is beneficial for the development of clinical skills. They welcomed the idea of implementing more procedure-based dissections alongside lectures and prosections-based practical (PBP) sessions. Cadaveric dissection plays an integral role in medical anatomy education. Time restraints and an increased focus on clinical significance, however, demand carefully considered adaptations of existing dissection protocols. The introduction of procedure-based dissection offers an innovative, highly engaging and clinically relevant package that would amalgamate skills essential to medical practice while retaining the benefits that have allowed dissection to stand the test of time.

Impact of Dissection Versus Prosection on Student Anatomical Knowledge Retention

Few topics invoke as much passion in anatomy education as the role of dissection in laboratory instruction. In 2004, The Anatomical Record (Part B: New Anatomist) published their oft‐cited debate forum on the necessity of dissection. Subsequent studies comparing dissection to other methods have noted extensive variability between educational programs and student populations making comparisons problematic. In 2017, WMed underwent a rapid transition from dissection to prosection‐based musculoskeletal instruction. This change provided a unique opportunity to compare the impact of each instructional method on anatomical knowledge retention as measured by summative and practical examination.At WMed, students completed a reciprocal peer‐teaching (RPT) module during the musculoskeletal system course between 2015 and 2017. The RPT module assigned a regional content area (back, shoulder/arm, forearm/hand, hip/thigh, and leg/foot) to anatomy teams of 5–6 students. Students learned regional content and then assisted their peers in learning this content. The first two classes (n=112) learned content via traditional dissection, while the third class (n= 72) learned their regional content on prosected specimens. Students had five sessions (13 hours) prior to the start of the course to learn the content and for the dissection cohorts to prepare their specimen. All cohorts completed a pre‐course quiz to ensure readiness to peer‐teach. Anatomy content, instructional time, and class metrics remained relatively constant between cohorts, with the exception of a single optional procedure component offered in 2017. Due to annual differences in exams and performance of students, scores for region specific exam questions were normalized to scores on the overall exam. Data was analyzed using an independent T‐test.Students in the prosection and dissection cohorts passed their region‐specific quiz at equal rates (p = 0.11). Student knowledge on practical or summative exam content related to regions they taught was not significantly different between prosection and dissection cohorts (p = 0.62 and p = 0.38, respectively). To further examine if there were differences between dissection and prosection cohorts, we examined student knowledge acquisition in each of the five regions individually. There were no statistically significant differences in knowledge on either the practical or summative exam questions relating to a specific region when compared to performance on the overall exam. This data suggests that student acquisition of knowledge was comparable regardless of learning method, prosection or dissection.An advantage of this study is the stability of variables between cohorts. Student groups taught the same objectives, course sequencing and content remained consistent between years, and students were tested in the same manner (written exam with multiple choice questions and laboratory practical). This analysis supports previous studies that conclude there are no disparities in the effectiveness of dissection or prosection. The greatest advantage of this study is the direct comparison of the effectiveness of prosection or dissection in anatomical knowledge retention while minimizing the confounding variables that complicate other studies.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

Abstract 47: Incidence of Cervical Artery Dissection Across Age Groups

Introduction: Dissection of a cervical artery has been well described as a cause of ischemic stroke in the young. The role of dissection as a cause of stroke among older adults is less clear, but there are no obvious reasons why older patients would have less of a predisposition to dissection than younger patients. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that the incidence of dissection-related ischemic stroke would remain constant across age. Methods: We used inpatient discharge data included in the 2012-2015 releases of the National Inpatient Survey (NIS). We used previously validated ICD-9-CM codes to identify adults who were hospitalized with ischemic stroke and a concomitant diagnosis of either carotid- or vertebral-artery dissection. We compared the prevalence of concomitant dissection among stroke hospitalizations across patient subgroups defined by age. Survey weights provided by the NIS were used to calculate nationally representative estimates. Population estimates from the U.S. census were used to calculate the incidence of hospitalization with stroke and concomitant dissection per million person-years. Results: From 2012-2015, there were 17,325 hospitalizations with ischemic stroke and a concomitant dissection in the US. The prevalence of cervical-artery dissection among stroke hospitalizations was highest among those under 40 years of age and gradually decreased across increasing 10-year age intervals (Figure 1A). On the other hand, the overall incidence of hospitalization for stroke and concomitant dissection increased with increasing age (Figure 1B). Conclusions: In a nationally representative sample, we found that cervical-artery dissection accounts for a greater proportion of ischemic strokes among younger patients, but the absolute incidence of dissection-related stroke increases with age.

Does Confucianism allow for body donation?

Confucianism has been widely perceived as a major moral and cultural obstacle to the donation of bodies for anatomical purposes. The rationale for this is the Confucian stress on xiao (filial piety), whereby individuals' bodies are to be intact at death. In the view of many, the result is a prohibition on the donation of bodies to anatomy departments for the purpose of dissection. The role of dissection throughout the development of anatomy within a Confucian context is traced, and in contemporary China the establishment of donation programs and the appearance of memorial monuments is noted. In reassessing Confucian attitudes, the stress laid on a particular interpretation of filial piety is questioned, and an attempt is made to balance this with the Confucian emphasis on a moral duty to those outside one's immediate family. The authors argue that the fundamental Confucian norm ren (humaneness or benevolence) allows for body donation as people have a moral duty to help others. Moreover, the other central Confucian value, li (rites), offers important insights on how body donation should be performed as a communal activity, particularly the necessity of developing ethically and culturally appropriate rituals for body donation. In seeking to learn from this from a Western perspective, it is contended that in all societies the voluntary donation of bodies is a deeply human activity that is to reflect the characteristics of the community within which it takes place. This is in large part because it has educational and personal repercussions for students. Anat Sci Educ 11: 525-531. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.

Does the experience of anatomical dissections change the mind of students? The opinion of Milanese undergraduate students towards the donation of bodies for didactic purposes

Anatomical dissections have always represented an important cornerstone of medical education, especially in anatomy [1,2]. However, in several universitary context their practice has been abandoned or even not yet introduced. In the University of Milan a limited program of body donation has existed since 2014 (PANDORA, Programma Anatomico di Donazione di Cadaveri a Scopo di Ricerca Antropologica e Biomedica) and therefore only in the last four years medical students have been able to take advantage from this crucial experience. This study aims at exploring the willingness of Italian undergraduate students towards whole body donation in order to ascertain the role of dissection in modifying the opinion: two groups of students belonging to the degree course in medicine and surgery were recruited. The first group included 43 students who were informed concerning the importance of dissection in anatomy through a specific course. The second group included 29 students admitted to a didactic autopsy. Students belonging to the two groups were then requested to specify if they would give their consent to the donation of their bodies, and why. Results showed that students who attended the dissection were more likely to show willingness towards body donation (60.7% versus 39.5%). Among positive opinions towards donation the percentage of persons who found the experience useful increased from 47.1% in the first group to 80% in the second group. On the other hand, among negative opinions, percentages of persons reporting bad feeling towards the dissection increased from 16.7% in the first group to 27.2% in the second group. This study shows that experience of dissection is a crucial step for emotional and professional improvement of medical students and contributes in a more detailed definition of their own opinion concerning body donation.

Dissection, prosection or both in teaching medical gross anatomy: An old question revisited

Thorough knowledge and understanding of human body which is foundation to medicine, partly comes from dissection. Dissection helps develop anatomical knowledge, value 3‐D relationships and normal variation, mental mapping for integration, motor skill and promotes empathy and professionalism. Now in medical education, the role of dissection is questioned and reevaluated due to diminished curriculum time, cost and availability of alternate teaching tools. In US, while no school has completely eliminated dissection many have included prosection and other teaching aids to teach anatomy. There is no definite answer to the superiority of one approach over the other. Often prosections are peer taught. In 2010 as part of TBL pedagogy, we adopted prosections to teach head and neck anatomy to medical students. In contrast to peer teaching, our small group teaching is faculty led for a period of 4 weeks with 2–3 case based discussion sessions. Students’ received focused study guide and periodic quizzes with immediate feedback. We evaluated the effectiveness of this approach analyzing students’ exam performance and course evaluation. Students performed as well or slightly better than the classes who dissected head and neck. Better performance could be due to more available study time and faculty led small group teaching. Analysis of the results and our approach will be detailed in the presentation.

Assessment of role of dissection in anatomy teaching from the perspective of undergraduate students: A qualitative study

Teaching of Anatomy and the use of dissection in undergraduate teaching is witnessing a major change in medical colleges of India. Undergraduate medical students in India go through an extensive Anatomy teaching by dissection. There has been much debate about use of dissection or prossected part Anatomy teaching and both sides of argument are significant. Many issues have been debated about variety of responses of undergraduate medical students to human cadaver, problems faced by students who are taught by dissection or by prossected part teaching and relative costs and educational merits of using cadaver with alternative methods. The present study is an attempt to express our views in this ongoing debate based on the views of undergraduate students gathered by their participation in this questionnaire based study. It was noted that both MBBS and BDS students found dissection as a tool that helps them in better understanding of Anatomy and provides to visualize different organs of human body and their relationship.

Impact of the use of cadaver on student’s ability to pass anatomy examination

Objectives: Controversial in the development of anatomical science education is the role of dissection in the teaching of anatomy. Several doubts have been expressed over the usefulness of the use of cadavers in gross anatomy studies. This work was designed to compare the outcomes from a cadaver dissection-based study with a non-cadaver-based study. Methods: A total of 128 medical students divided into two groups were used for this study. Both groups were required to study the gross anatomy of a given region. While Group A used cadaver dissection and other methods of studying anatomy available in the department, Group B studied with all the materials made available for Group A, but without a cadaver. Both groups undertook the same essay and multiple-choice exams on the region studied. Results: The mean score for the various parts of the exam noted for Group A was 65%, while that for B was 55%. The percentage number of students with distinction grades in A was 39 while B was 17. In all, 91% of the students in Group A attained the pass mark while only 63% from B did. Conclusion: The students that had a cadaver dissection-based study did better in all aspects of the exams with a significant difference between the mean scores of both groups. Standard deviations were smaller for the group that studied with cadaver in all aspects of the exam.

Thank you from The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist

The New Anatomist has been a section of The Anatomical Record and an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists since 1998. The journal has enjoyed much support from authors and readers alike, eager to share in our unique perspectives on the anatomical sciences. We are ending our publication run with this issue, in order to pave the way for new publication opportunities being considered by the AAA and Wiley. On behalf of the Editorial Advisory Board and publisher John Wiley & Sons, I would like to express our appreciation for all those who have contributed time and talent to The New Anatomist over these eight years. Hundreds of authors and expert referees have endeavored to fill each issue of The New Anatomist with diverse and valuable articles. Please accept our heartfelt thanks for your efforts. With much gratitude we also recognize our Panel of Reviewers, listed on the inside cover, who provided keen insight and advice to authors and editors alike. Special recognition and appreciation go out to several Guest Editors of special issues: Bruce Carlson, Kathryn Jones, David Lester, and Robert Silver; and two former guest editors on our current Editorial Advisory Board: Richard Drake and James Olds. These individuals organized outstanding special issues on topics as wide-ranging as biomedical imaging, stem cell research, mammalian tissue regeneration, and advances in anatomical education. I also tip my hat to Robert Trelease and Geoffrey Guttmann, who in 2004 co-organized (with Richard Drake) an informative and provocative Debate Forum on the role of dissection in anatomy education. We especially appreciate our readers and supporters from the AAA, who offered valuable feedback that helped to inform the development of the journal over the years. Of course, special thanks go to all those at John Wiley & Sons who have worked hard behind the scenes to ensure the timely publication of this journal — most recently, Tracie Butchko in our Editorial Office and Cecilia Banzon in the Production Department. I must now personally thank the Editorial Advisory Board members, past and present, who invited outstanding articles and oversaw peer review of submissions. Past board members not currently listed on the journal's inside cover are Karen Augustine-Rauch, Frank Longo, David Lester, Sue O'Shea, Robert Trelstad, Thomas Van de Water, and Debra Wolgemuth. Founding Editorial Board Chairman Duane E. Haines deserves special recognition for his vision and inspiration from the very beginning of this venture, shaping The New Anatomist into a truly unique scientific publication. I admire Duane and the other advisory editors who published extensively in The New Anatomist, thus placing their faith behind the journal in a unique and proactive way. I have come away from our experiences all the richer, with not only a deeper appreciation for the anatomical sciences, but also important friendships that I hope will last well into the future.

The Changing Role of Dissection in Medical Education

The Changing Role of Dissection in Medical Education

Dissection as an instructional technique in secondary science: choice and alternatives.

AbstractThis article examines the role of dissection in the teaching of secondary biology and environmental science, within the context of the development of attitudes toward animals. Retrospective data concerning their experience in high school with dissection for 191 undergraduate education students are described, and their reported use of alternatives to invasive animal study are evaluated in relation to specific educational objectives in secondary science. It was found that most students were required to perform dissections, that many but not most experienced negative and stable emotional reactions, and that teachers employed limited alternatives to dissection in their classes. The implications of this for secondary science teaching and for teacher education are discussed.