The use and effectiveness of interactive progressive drawing in anatomy education

Anatomical relationships are challenging concepts for first‐year medical students. The use of progressive drawing, where an image is created from a blank template, has long been utilized for outlining anatomical relationships and continuity from one region to another, and has shown positive outcomes for student learning. More recently, computerized progressive drawing has been introduced; however, challenges, including issues with visual clarity, have been described. In this study, 17 computerized screencasts of drawings covering neurovasculature of the limbs, abdomen, pelvis, head, and neck were created and provided to first‐year medical students at Morehouse School of Medicine. An animated method for drawing was utilized to increase visual clarity. Surveys were provided to 181 first‐year medical students to collect feedback about these screencasts. Sixty percent (n = 108) of students completed at least one survey. Respondents rated all 17 screencasts with a minimum of 4.7/5 for helpfulness in learning the material for course examinations. A majority of students (77.8%) reported viewing the screencasts more than once on at least one survey, and students reported varying methods for utilizing the screencasts. A majority of students provided positive feedback relating to technical quality. Some significant differences in course performance were seen based on screencast usage. The positive responses from students indicate that this is a useful method in medical education. Anat Sci Educ 11: 445–460. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.     

Resident perceptions of anatomy education: a survey of medical school alumni from two different anatomy curricula and multiple medical specialties

In 2004, the University of Michigan Medical School reduced its gross anatomy curriculum. To determine the effect of this reduction on resident perceptions of their clinical preparedness, we surveyed alumni that included residents from the original and new shortened curricula. A Likert-scale survey was sent to four classes of alumni. Respondents were compared in old curriculum (OC) and new curriculum (NC) groups, surgical specialty (SS) and nonsurgical specialty (NS) groups, and subgroups of SS and NS were compared for differences between OC and NC. Mean response scores were compared using independent samples T-tests. As a single population (n = 110), respondents felt their anatomy education prepared them well for residency, that a more robust anatomy curriculum would be helpful, that dissection was important to their residency preparation, and that a 4th year anatomy elective was effective in expanding their anatomy education and preparing them for residency. No significant difference existed between OC and NC groups, neither as a whole nor as SS and NS subgroups. The SS group felt dissection was more important to their residency preparation than the NS group (P = 0.001) and that a more robust anatomy curriculum would have better prepared them for residency (P = 0.001). Thirty percent of SS respondents who did not take a 4th year elective commented that they wish they had. Fourth year anatomy electives were highly valued by residents, and respondents felt that they should be offered to students as a way of revisiting anatomy following the 1st year of clinical training.     

Design,implementation, and evaluation of an innovative anatomy course

Starting in 2004, a medical school gross anatomy course faced with a 30% cut in hours went through an extensive redesign, which transformed a traditional dissection course into a course with a clinical focus, learning societies, and extensive on‐line learning support. Built into the redesign process was an extensive and ongoing assessment process, which included student focus groups, faculty development, surveys, and examinations. These assessments were used formatively, to enhance the course from year to year, and summatively, to determine how well the course was meeting the new learning objectives. The assessments from focus groups and faculty development prompted changes in support structures provided to students and the training and preparation of faculty. Survey results showed that, after student satisfaction declined the first year, satisfaction increased steadily through the fourth iteration as the course gained acceptance by students and faculty alike. There was a corresponding increase in the performance of students on course examinations. An additional examination given to students one and a half and three years after their anatomy course ended demonstrated the redesigned course's long‐term effectiveness for retaining anatomical knowledge and applying it to clinical cases. Compared to students who took the original course, students who took the shorter, more clinical course performed as well, or better, on each section of the examination. We attribute these positive results to the innovative course design and to the changes made based on our formative assessment program. Anat Sci Educ, 2010. © 2010 American Association of Anatomists.     

An outsider's perspective on a provocative proposal: What would Flexner think?

This viewpoint commentary focuses on a proposal for integrated anatomy education in undergraduate college from Dr. Darda published in the Anatomical Sciences Education. Although the proposal is for college level education, the proposal echoes some ideas proposed a century ago by Abraham Flexner when he wrote his report titled “Medical Education in the United States and Canada.” It begins with an acknowledgement of the author's status as an outsider. There have been numerous calls for change in basic science education, particularly in medical education. Interestingly, however, the monumental reforms of the “Flexner Report” were impelled largely from outside the specific discipline of medical education. The commentary discussion then moves to observations about the proposal for Integrative Anatomy and support for the proposal from both the Flexner Report and the 2009 report from the Association of American Medical Colleges and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, “Scientific Foundations for Future Physicians.” The essay considers the benefits of the research on the learning sciences that now inform our work in education; the influence of competency‐based education that frees education from a lock‐step approach of course completion to a student‐focused integrative approach to learning; and the availability of online resources for anatomy education through repositories, such as MedEdPORTAL. The final observation is that the changes underway in education and in the sciences basic to medicine, in particular, are substantial and will require the dialogue that Dr. Darda is promoting with his provocative proposal. Anat Sci Educ 3: 101–102, 2010. © 2010 American Association of Anatomists.     

Musculoskeletal Radiology Teaching at a UK Medical School: Do We Need to Improve?

The United Kingdom is currently facing crisis due to a shortage of radiology consultants despite ever-increasing demand for medical imaging. The specifics of how best to teach radiology has generated increasing interest. This study aims to determine whether musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology teaching at the University of Nottingham (UoN) Medical School is perceived to be satisfactory by medical students, Foundation-Year doctors, and senior medical professionals in preparing students for the demands working as Foundation-Year doctors. Questionnaires were distributed to all medical students and Foundation-Year doctors that graduated from UoN (n = 307). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consultants and teaching staff (n = 13). Forty-nine percent of preclinical medical students, 43% of clinical students and 27% of Foundation-Year doctors thought MSK radiology teaching was not sufficient in preparing them for the radiology challenges Foundation-Year doctors' face. This difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The consensus from senior medical professionals was that MSK Radiology teaching is currently adequate and producing competent students. Interestingly, only 5% of students were considering a career in radiology compared to 34% of Foundation-Year doctors. Overall, there seems to be concern among students regarding MSK radiology teaching and students have a lack of confidence with MSK radiology. Foundation-Year doctors and senior medical professionals do not share this view. This may be due to medical students' lack of clarity on what is required of them. Formal documentation of set learning objectives for MSK radiology throughout the curriculum may address this.