Search

Abstract The changing of education activities (offline into online) to reduce coronavirus transmission during COVID-19 pandemi has influence on the learning strategies, which ultimately might impact the achievement of learning objectives. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional study using a valid (p

An opinion regarding curriculum, teaching methodology & assessment techniques in anatomy was taken from the First MBBS students at Medical college Baroda with specially designed questionnaire. Majority of the students feel the curriculum can be taught in present one year duration with present system lecture timetables. The best method of learning is the dissection hall teaching & the students should be shown the structures and their relations rather than discussing these things in lectures. Majority of the students feel that the subject related books in library are not enough but they are aware of internet as an effective learning tool. Majority students opined that the best method of assessment is tests e.g. viva & part ending tests. This study show that the planning about the curriculum, teaching methodology & assessment techniques is decided by the senior faculty members but the opinion of the students is reasonable & justifiable and needs to be heard in deciding this aspect.

Introduction. During the COVID-19 pandemic-induced lockdown, the selection of simple and authentic online material among plethora of web content is difficult for both students and teachers. This forces students and teachers to explore various avenues of learning. The objective of this research was to evaluate free open-access anatomy e-learning resources in accordance with required standard learning outcomes for medical students. Methods. During February 2021, an extensive search for online modules for learning anatomy across six Massive Open Online Courses, including edX, Coursera, Udemy, Khan Academy, Canvas and FutureLearn, along with Google and YouTube was conducted. Courses or modules on e-learning platforms, YouTube channels, standalone videos, anatomy atlases, 3D models were considered as learning resources and evaluated. Online materials were classified as structured learning resources if they had a defined syllabus, time duration and instructional design. Resources lacking these characteristics were considered as unstructured ones. Results. Twenty structured learning courses were identified on the Udemy (6 courses), Coursera (3 courses), edX (2 courses), FutureLearn and Khan academy platforms. Learning resources available through Swayam Prabha were aligned with the defined syllabus and video lectures. The content hosted within Clinical Anatomy, Medvizz and Kenhub was eye-catching. Thirty-two YouTube channels offering standalone learning material were identified. Seven resource materials, other than YouTube channels, offered anatomy learning material in the form of charts and tables. Four websites noted to have 3D interactive learning content regarding gross anatomy. Conclusions. During the pandemic-induced lockdown, the list presented in the study may act as guide in selection of the simplest and best materials for those teaching and learning anatomy in medical undergraduate courses. However, in most cases, there is no alignment with standard learning outcomes as defined by medical education regulatory authorities.

Background A sound knowledge of human anatomy is a maj’or requirement for being a good physician or a practicing surgeon. Despite digitalization and modernization of education sector, traditional cadaveric dissection still occupies the leadership of anatomy education. It is becoming an untold truth that no modern technologies such as virtual dissection or 3D model printing could replace cadaveric dissection in its way of teaching students. Methods Recent research studies on modern anatomical teaching methods for medical and non-medical students and their influences are reviewed. Results Despite new technologies, traditional cadaveric dissection helps students to acquire more practical knowledge and still occupies prior position on its way.

Recent changes to anatomy education across UK medical schools are thought to be contributing towards a lower proficiency in anatomical expertise amongst students. The introduction of alternative learning methods may help to overcome this. Prosections and 3D online anatomy resources are both used as alternative methods for learning anatomy, but it is not clear which of these methods provides a better outcome. The aim of this study was to compare students' learning of the anatomy of the hand and forearm using a functional Thiel prosection or a 3D online resource to see which method was associated with a better outcome on an anatomy quiz. The secondary aim was to see which of these methods was preferred by students. A cohort of 37 medical students at the University of Dundee participated in this crossover study. Group A learnt about the anterior compartment of the hand and forearm using the prosection followed by taking an appropriate quiz. They then used the 3D online resource to learn about the posterior compartment before again completing a relevant quiz. Group B carried out the study in reverse, using the prosection to learn about the posterior compartment and the 3D online resource to learn about the anterior compartment, each followed by completing the relevant quiz. All participants then completed a questionnaire about each of the learning methods. The results showed no significant difference in quiz performance after using the Thiel prosection compared to using the 3D online resource (p>0.05). Feedback from questionnaires suggested that the majority of participants preferred using the prosection to learn functional anatomy. Limitations of this study include the small sample size and the type of assessment method used. The results of this study were inconclusive and further studies are required to determine which resource is a better tool for learning anatomy.

Aims: Designing a new approach for learning gross anatomy to improve students′ motivation to study anatomy and to enable them to learn independently through case discussion. Materials and Methods: The study included newly registered students in the first academic year. The total number of students was 165, who were divided by alphabetical order into 15 groups of 11 students. Each group was led by one faculty member and each faculty member lead 3 groups. Each group met twice a week for 2 weeks to discuss one case related to the upper limb anatomy. Students took pre- and posttests and completed an opinion questionnaire about the case discussions. Results: The pretest score shows that 20% of the students received grades of 60% or above and that 80% received grades less than 60%. The posttest showed that 45% of the students received grades of 60% or above and that 55% received grades less than 60%. There was a significant difference between the pre- and posttest for grades 60% (P = 0.0023). In addition, 17% of students achieved the same results (less than 60%) in both the pre- and posttests. The questionnaire revealed that all students stated that the discussion method was useful in their learning process, helped them to increase their motivation to study anatomy (85%), know the usefulness of studying anatomy (84%), and understand the problems (91%). Conclusions: The implementation of the case discussion in teaching anatomy can increase the students′ understanding and motivate them to learn.

La importancia del conocimiento anatómico para la interpretación de las imágenes diagnósticas es reconocida y aceptada. El desarrollo tecnológico basado en tomografía axial computada y resonancia magnética nuclear han incrementado los requerimientos. En nuestra Facultad, el curso de Anatomía incluye la identificación de estructuras anatómicas normales. Intentamos demostrar los resultados a largo plazo de este cambio curricular. Este estudio consideró dos grupos: A) 274 estudiantes de primer año, B) 100 médicos recientemente graduados. Ambos grupos fueron evaluados con un cuestionario sobre las mismas tomografía axial computada y resonancia magnética nuclear. En el grupo A, el 13% de los estudiantes respondió correctamente, mientras que nadie lo hizo así en el grupo B. Dos por ciento del grupo A dieron respuestas erróneas a todas las preguntas, mientras que ascendió al 26% en el grupo B. El promedio de respuestas correctas fue de 60% en el grupo A y de 45% en el B. El grupo B se subdividió en B1) aquellos graduados que estudiaron anatomía con imágenes diagnósticas y B2) quienes no lo hicieron. Las respuestas correctas del grupo B1 fue 66% y del grupo B2, 40%. Estos resultados muestran la significación del conocimiento anatómico para la identificación de las diferentes estructuras en imágenes diagnósticas. Mientras los estudiantes desarrollaban el curso de Anatomía la identificación fue más sencilla, y resultó más compleja cuando transcurrió el tiempo. Sin embargo, los resultados fueron mejores en aquellos graduados que cursaron con identificación de estructuras anatómicas en imágenes diagnósticas que en aquellos que no lo hicieron. The importance of anatomical knowledge for the comprehensive understanding of the diagnostic images is well known and accepted. Development of new techniques, based on computerized tomography and magnetic resonance have increased the requisite core knowledge. In our Faculty, the course of Anatomy includes the identification of normal anatomical structures in diagnostic images. We intend to demonstrate the long-term results provided by this curricular change. This study considered the following two groups: A) 274 first year medical students, B) 100 recently graduated physicians. Both groups were evaluated on their comprehension of computed tomography and magnetic resonance. In group A, 13% of the students answered all questions correctly; while 0% did in group B. Two per cent of the people in group A incorrectly answered all the questions; this percentage rose to 26% in group B. The average of correct answers in group A was 60%, while it was 45% in group B. Group B was further subdivided into B1) those graduates that studied anatomy with diagnostic images and B2) those who did not. Group B1 answered correctly on 66% of questions and group B2’s correct responses were at 40%.These results showed the significance of anatomical knowledge necessary to identify the different structures in diagnostic images. Students scored better on this evaluation instrument when they were taking Anatomy, as compared to graduates who were further removed from the content. However, results were better for those graduates that had taken an anatomy course identifying the anatomical structures in the diagnostic images, than those who did not.