Premium
Musculoskeletal Anatomy Education: Evaluating the Influence of Different Methods of Delivery on Medical Students Perception and Academic Performance
Author(s) -
Peeler Jason,
Longo Alison,
Bergen Hugo
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.30.1_supplement.782.2
Subject(s) - medical education , curriculum , cohort , perception , medicine , inclusion (mineral) , dissection (medical) , medical school , medical physics , psychology , radiology , pathology , pedagogy , social psychology , neuroscience
Medical schools have traditionally used a dissection‐based approach for educating students about musculoskeletal (MSK) anatomy. There is a growing trend towards the use of prosected, and 2 or 3‐D imaging materials as learning resources. While data may suggest that these methods of delivery enhance the learning environment, controversy still exists among medical educators about the most efficient or effective way to educate students. Purpose The main objective of this investigation was to examine whether the method of educational delivery would influence student perceptions about learning, and academic performance on MSK anatomy exams. Methods Undergraduate students from the same medical school were compared. One cohort was educated using a dissection based teaching model; the second cohort was taught using a prosection based method of delivery. All other aspects of the MSK curriculum were the same, including contact hours. Information was gathered about student perceptions using a standardized survey that compared 6 different methods of delivery (dissection/prosection/lecture/case‐based/on‐line/medical imaging) on 8 specific learning objectives. Survey results were compared against student performance on MSK practical exams. Results Ninety‐three students (dissection=39, prosection=54) participated. Only 27 students had previously taken an anatomy course. Both groups rated learning via medical imaging and case based scenarios highly. Each cohort ranked their specific method of delivery (dissect vs prosect) in the top 3. There was no significant difference in the academic performance between the groups. Conclusions Data support the inclusion of medical imaging and case‐based scenarios as a key component of MSK anatomy curriculum, but suggest that little difference exists in student performance when comparing dissection and prosection based curriculums. These results should help guide the selection of effective MSK anatomy delivery methods within medical programs. Support or Funding Information Funding provided through the University of Manitoba teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund