Massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs) provide a significant dilemma for orthopaedic surgeons. One treatment option for MIRCTs is reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. However, other methods of treating these massive tears have been developed. A search of the current literature on nonoperative management, arthroscopic debridement, partial repair, superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), graft interposition, balloon spacer arthroplasty, trapezius transfer, and latissimus dorsi transfer for MIRCTs was performed. Studies that described each surgical technique and reported on clinical outcomes were included in this review. Arthroscopic debridement may provide pain relief by removing damaged rotator cuff tissue, but no functional repair is performed. Partial repair has been suggested as a technique to restore shoulder functionality by repairing as much of the rotator cuff tendon as possible. This technique has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes but also fails at a significantly high rate. SCR has recently gained interest as a method to prohibit superior humeral head translation and has been met with encouraging early clinical outcomes. Graft interposition bridges the gap between the retracted tendon and humerus. Balloon spacer arthroplasty has also been recently proposed and acts to prohibit humeral head migration by placing a biodegradable saline-filled spacer between the humeral head and acromion; it has been shown to provide good clinical outcomes. Both trapezius and latissimus dorsi transfer techniques involve transferring the tendon of these respective muscles to the greater tuberosity of the humerus; these 2 techniques have shown promising restoration in shoulder function, especially in a younger, active population. Arthroscopic debridement, partial repair, SCR, graft interposition, balloon spacer arthroplasty, trapezius transfer, and latissimus dorsi transfer have all been shown to improve clinical outcomes for patients presenting with MIRCTs. Randomized controlled trials are necessary for confirming the efficacy of these procedures and to determine when each is indicated based on specific patient and anatomic factors.

Few discussions regarding instructional methods incite as much passion as the debate over dissection versus prosection. Despite numerous analyses, few studies have isolated the impact of dissection versus prosection from the numerous variables that are involved in anatomy education. This study used a retrospective design to assess the effect of peer teaching with dissection or prosection on anatomical knowledge retention of the peer teachers. Exam scores were analyzed from three cohorts of students ( N = 184) who were enrolled in a Musculoskeletal System course in an allopathic medical school between academic years 2014–2017. Students in the first 2 yr learned anatomy of an assigned region through traditional dissection, whereas students in the third year learned anatomy of the same regions on prosected specimens. The effect of these instructional methods on anatomical knowledge retention was measured by student performance on a teaching-readiness quiz, written exam, and practical examination. One advantage of this study is the stability of variables between cohorts. Student groups peer taught the same objectives; course sequencing and content remained consistent between years; students spent the same amount of time learning their material, regardless of learning modality (dissection or prosection); and students were tested in the same manner. Comparisons of student performance data suggest that anatomy knowledge was equivalent, regardless of the instructional method (dissection or prosected cadavers) but is strongly associated with prior anatomy experience. Findings from this study support previous studies that conclude that there are no disparities in the effectiveness of learning anatomy via dissection or prosection.

This study describes a new teaching model for ultrasound (US) training, and evaluates its effect on medical student attitudes toward US. First year medical students participated in hands-on US during human gross anatomy (2014 N = 183; 2015 N = 182). The sessions were facilitated by clinicians alone in 2014, and by anatomy teaching assistant (TA)-clinician pairs in 2015. Both cohorts completed course evaluations which included five US-related items on a four-point scale; cohort responses were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests with significance threshold set at 0.05. The 2015 survey also evaluated the TAs (three items, five-point scale). With the adoption of the TA-clinician teaching model, student ratings increased significantly for four out of five US-items: "US advanced my ability to learn anatomy" increased from 2.91 ± 0.77 to 3.35 ± 0.68 (P < 0.0001), "Incorporating US increased my interest in anatomy" from 3.05 ± 0.84 to 3.50 ± 0.71 (P < 0.0001), "US is relevant to my current educational needs" from 3.36 ± 0.63 to 3.54 ± 0.53 (P = 0.015), and "US training should start in Phase I" from 3.36 ± 0.71 to 3.56 ± 0.59 (P = 0.010). Moreover, more than 84% of students reported that TAs enhanced their understanding of anatomy (mean 4.18 ± 0.86), were a valuable part of US training (mean 4.23 ± 0.89), and deemed the TAs proficient in US (mean 4.24 ± 0.86). By using an anatomy TA-clinician teaching team, this study demonstrated significant improvements in student perceptions of the impact of US on anatomy education and the relevancy of US training to the early stages of medical education. Anat Sci Educ 11: 175-184. © 2017 American Association of Anatomists.

Introduction: Simulation has become a well-recognized and innovative tool in medical education. While there has been tremendous growth of simulation curricula at the level of graduate medical education, there have been few studies looking at simulation as a learning tool for undergraduate medical education. The goal of this study was to determine if highfidelity simulation training impacts medical student perception of knowledge and confidence regarding comprehension and application of advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) algorithms. Methods: This is a prospective observational survey study of third and fourth year medical students who participated in an ACLS simulation training during their emergency medicine rotation between January 2018 and October 2018. Cases covered several ACLS topics including unstable bradycardia, supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia. After each session, students received a short survey to assess their simulation experience pertaining to knowledge and comfort levels with ACLS topics before and after the simulation experience. Results: A total of 89 students were included in the study with 86.5% of those being fourth year students. There was a significant increase in both knowledge (pre-training 3.17 vs. 4.11 posttraining, p<0.001) and comfort scores (pre-training 2.54 vs. 3.74 post-training, p<0.001) after the ACLS simulation training. Overall, 77.5% of students reported an increase in knowledge and 83.1% reported an increase in confidence after the training session. Conclusions: The study revealed a statistically significant increase in both perceived knowledge and comfort and confidence of medical students after high-fidelity simulation using ACLS scenarios.

No abstract