medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-5057 (Print)
Investigación en Educación Médica

2022, Number 41

<< Back Next >>

Inv Ed Med 2022; 11 (41)

Radiological anatomy as an alternative approach in anatomy teaching. Perception and performance of medical students

Chang CAYC, Mejía BLL, Chavarría REM, Osmany SN, Robles ADM

Language: English
References: 36
Page: 26-34
PDF size: 455.39 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: In resource-deprived countries, dissection as means of teaching anatomy is often not feasible due to limited availability of bodies, high cost, and safety risks. In Nicaragua, anatomy and radiology education is in an independent format in the medical curriculum.
Objective: This paper aims to explore the impact (performance and perceptions) of the use of radiological images in teaching anatomy in medical students from a resources-deprived country.
Method: An extracurricular course of radiologic anatomy of the trunk was implemented to third (n=87) and sixth (n=67) year medical students. Pre-and post-test and a post-course survey were applied. Mean, median, and SD were calculated, with a confidence interval level of 95%.
Results: Perceptions from both groups were similar. Re- garding radiological techniques: CT (82.8% junior and 94% senior students) was the most helpful, and ultrasound was the least (49.4% junior and 67.2% senior). Didactic resource acceptance: study guide (73.6% junior and 82.1% senior) and digital-interactive atlas (69% junior and 80.6% senior) got the highest score, while printed books (36.8% junior and 59.7% senior) got the lowest score. The pre-test scores were similar in both groups (mean of correct answer 7.98 junior and 8.22 senior). The mean of correct answers increased in both groups in the post-test: 32.03 for junior and 32.82 for senior students (p=0.000).
Conclusions: Integration of radiology and anatomy positively impacts medical students; it should be implemented through a self-directed learning approach and considered complementary in the medical curriculum as a good alter- native for teaching anatomy in countries where dissection is not feasible


REFERENCES

  1. Chang Chan A, Cate O, Custers E, Leeuwen M, Bleys R. Approaches of anatomy teaching for seriously resource-deprived countries: A literature review. Educ Heal Chang Learn Pract. 2019;32(2):62–74.

  2. Marker DR, Bansal AK, Juluru K, Magid D. Developing a radiology-based teaching approach for gross anatomy in the digital era. Acad Radiol. 2010 Aug;17(8):1057–65.

  3. Li L, Liu YX, Song ZJ. Three-Dimensional Reconstruction of Registered and Fused Chinese Visible Human and Patient MRI Images. Clin Anat. 2006;231(February):225–31.

  4. de Barros N, Rodrigues CJ, Rodrigues Jr AJ, de Negri Germano MA, Cerri GG. The value of teaching sectional anatomy to improve CT scan interpretation. Clin Anat [Internet]. 2001 Jan [cited 2012 Sep 3];14(1):36–41. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11135396

  5. McLachlan JC, Regan De Bere S. How we teach anatomy without cadavers. Clin Teach [Internet]. 2004 Dec [cited 2012 Sep 3];1(2):49–52. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/ j.1743-498X.2004.00038.x

  6. Heptonstall NB, Ali T, Mankad K, Dip P. Integrating radiology and anatomy teaching in Medical education in the UK - The Evidence, current trends and future scope. Acad Radiol. 2016;(23):521–6.

  7. Brown B, Adhikari S, Marx J, Lander L, Todd GL. Introduction of Ultrasound into Gross Anatomy Curriculum: Perceptions of Medical Students. J Emerg Med [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2012 Sep 3]; Available from: http://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0736467912001308

  8. Collins J. Modern approaches to teaching and learning anatomy. Br Med J. 2008;665–7.

  9. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A, K. S, P. A, A. K. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ [Internet]. 2010;3(2):83–93. Available from: http:// ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D= emed9&NEWS=N&AN=20205265

  10. Sadler T, Zhang T, Taylor H, Brassett C. The role of radiology in anatomy teaching in UK medical schools: a national survey. Clin Radiol. 2018;73(2):185–90.

  11. Phillips AW, Smith SG, Straus CM. The role of radiology in preclinical anatomy: a critical review of the past, present, and future. Acad Radiol. 2013;20(3):297–304.

  12. Davy S, Phelan N, Ali ZA, O’Keeffe G, Barry D. An assessment of the integration of radiology to enhance undergraduate anatomy teaching. In: European Society of Radiology. 2016. p. 1–18.

  13. Dettmer S, Tschernig T, Galanski M, Pabst R, Rieck B. Teaching surgery, radiology, and anatomy together: the mix enhances motivation and comprehension. Surg Radiol Anat [Internet]. 2010 Oct [cited 2012 Aug 1];32(8):791–5. Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/w80408x768w7506m/

  14. Chan KS, Zary N. Applications and Challenges of Implementing Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Integrative Review. JMIR Med Educ. 2019;5(1):e13930.

  15. Ivanusic J, Cowle B, Barrington M. Undergraduate student perceptions of the use of ultrasonography in the study of “Living Anatomy.” Anat Sci Educ [Internet]. 2010;3:318–22. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ ase.180/abstract

  16. Khalil MK, Payer AF, Johnson TE. Effectiveness of using cross-sections in recognition of anatomical structures in radiological images. Anat Rec B New Anat [Internet]. 2005 Mar [cited 2012 Sep 3];283(1):9–13. Available from: http:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15761832

  17. Rengier F, Doll S, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Kirsch J, Kauczor H-U, Giesel FL. Integrated teaching of anatomy and radiology using three-dimensional image post-processing. Eur Radiol [Internet]. 2009 Dec [cited 2012 Sep 4];19(12):2870–7. Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/ d517312182j85k0m/

  18. Moscova M, Bryce DA, Sindhusake D, Young N. Integration of medical imaging including ultrasound into new clinical anatomy. Anat Sci Ed. 2014;8(3):205–2020.

  19. Creswell JW. Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Second edition. Benson AC, editor. New York, United States of America: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall; 2005. 623 p.

  20. Amin Z, Tani M, Hoon Eng K, Samarasekara DD, Chan YH. Motivation, study habits, and expectations of medical students in Singapore. Med Teach. 2009;31(12):e-560-e-569.

  21. Dornan T, Boshuizen H, King N, Scherpbier A. Experiencebased learning: A model linking the processes and outcomes of medical students’ workplace learning. Med Educ. 2007;41(1):84–91.

  22. Jack A, Burbridge B. The Utilisation of Radiology for the Teaching of Anatomy in Canadian Medical Schools. Can Assoc Radiol J [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2012 Sep 3];63(3):160–4. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0846537110002342

  23. Bell LTO, Dick O, Ali N, Little D. Undergraduate radiology education: foundation doctors’ experiences and preferences. Clin Radiol [Internet]. 2019;74(6):480–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2019.01.029

  24. Mirsadraee S, Mankad K, McCoubrie P, Roberts T, Kessel D. Radiology curriculum for undergraduate medical studies - A consensus survey. Clin Radiol [Internet]. 2012;67(12):1155–61. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2012.03.017

  25. Kumar PA, Jothi R, Mathivanan D. Self-directed learning modules of CT scan images to improve students’ perception of gross anatomy. Educ Heal Chang Learn Pract. 2016; 29(2):152–5.

  26. Sturges D, Maurer TW, Kosturik A. Using Study Guides in Undergraduate Human Anatomy and Physiology Classes: Student Perceptions and Academic Performance. Int J Kinesiol High Educ [Internet]. 2017;1(1):18–27. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/24711616.2016.1277672

  27. Khamseh ME, Aghili R, Emami Z, Malek M, Mafinezhad MK, Taghavinia M, et al. Study guides improves self-learning skills in clinical endocrinology. Med Teach. 2012;34(4):337–8.

  28. Dilara K, Ravichandran L, Abirami V, Vijayaraghavan P V. Student perception on study guides in an integrated preclinical curriculum. Sri Ramachandra J Med. 2014;7(2):9–13.

  29. Khogali SEO, Laidlaw JM, Harden RM. Study guides: A study of different formats. Med Teach. 2006;28(4):375–7.

  30. Taylor S, Watson P. The Impact Of Study Guides On "Matric" Performance: Evidence From A Randomised Experiment. Stellenbosch Econ Work Pap Ser [Internet]. 2015;13/15:1–26. Available from: https://www.ekon.sun.ac.za/wpapers/2015/ wp132015

  31. Laidlaw JM, Harden RM. What is... A study guide? Med Teach. 1990;12(1):7–12.

  32. Harden RM, Laidlaw JM, Hesketh EA. AMEE medical education guide No 16: Study guides - Their use and preparation. Med Teach. 1999;21(3):248–65.

  33. Bergman EM, Sieben JM, Smailbegovic I, de Bruin ABH, Scherpbier AJJA, van der Vleuten CPM. Constructive, collaborative, contextual, and self-directed learning in surface anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ. 2013;6(2):114–24.

  34. Goubran EZ, Vinjamury SP. Interactive Atlas of Histology: A Tool for Self-Directed Learning, Practice, and Self-Assessment. J Chiropr Educ. 2007;21(1):12–8.

  35. Guy R, Pisani HR, Rich P, Leahy C, Mandarano G, Molyneux T. Less is more: Development and evaluation of an interactive e-atlas to support anatomy learning. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8(2):126–32.

  36. Du Toit-Brits C, van Zyl CM. Self-directed learning characteristics: making learning personal, empowering, and successful. Africa Educ Rev. 2017;14(3–4):122–41.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com