Participation in Dissection Affects Student Performance on Gross Anatomy Practical and Written Examinations: Results of a Four‐Year Comparative Study

Abstract

The role of human dissection in modern medical curricula has been a topic of intense debate. In part, this is because dissection can be time‐consuming and curricular hours are being monitored more carefully. This has led some to question the efficacy and importance of dissection as a teaching method. While this topic has received considerable attention in the literature, the question of how dissection impacts learning has been difficult to evaluate in a real‐world, high‐stakes setting since participation in dissection is often one of many variables. In this study, this challenge was overcome due to a change in the curriculum of a Special Master Program (SMP) that permitted a comparison between two years of students that learned anatomy using prosection only and two years of students that participated in dissection laboratories. Since each class of SMP students took courses in the medical school, and the medical school anatomy curriculum was constant, medical student performance served as a control throughout the study period. Results demonstrate that SMP students who learned through prosection had lower performance on anatomy practical and written examinations compared to medical students. When the SMP program changed and students started participating in dissection, there were measurable improvements in both practical and written examinations. These findings provide evidence of dissection’s role in learning and applying anatomy knowledge both within and outside the gross anatomy laboratory.

Time Spent in Practicing Dissection Correlated with Improvement in Anatomical Knowledge of Students: Experimental Study in an Integrated Learning Program

“…However, previous studies have shown a very minimal difference in scores between students practicing dissection and those who learned anatomy by using prosections and anatomical models though learning from dissected cadavers is the satisfactory method of study. Recent studies show that students favor prosections and models than using cadavers, and some anatomists believe that prosections can replace full-body dissection in coming years especially in those institutions that have adopted an integrated curriculum and PBL as a teachinglearning method and this may be attributed to limited time for practicing dissection [27,28].…”

A Novel Approach to Gross Dissection of the Human Pelvis and Perineum

“…Cadaveric dissection has been, and still remains, a central tenet of gross anatomy and medical education (Pabst, 2009;Böckers et al, 2010;Hildebrandt, 2010;McBride and Drake, 2018;Thompson and Marshall, 2020). Recent studies indicate that medical students both want and expect to dissect the human body as a part of their educational experience (Gregory and Cole, 2002;Johnson, 2002;Mintz, 2016;Pais et al, 2017).…”

“…The development of integrated medical curriculum has increased from 61% in 2010-2011 to 76% in 2013-2014, further fragmenting the laboratory experience (Drake et al, 2014;Mintz, 2016;McBride and Drake, 2018). Studies indicate that elimination of gross anatomy dissection from the curriculum results in diminished student learning and runs counter to student preference (Rizzolo and Stewart, 2006;Pais et al, 2017;Thompson and Marshall, 2020). As a result, medical schools that had initially eliminated gross dissection have reinstated it as a part of their current curricula (Mintz, 2016).…”

Assessing the Impact of Clinically Themed Dissection-based Projects on Anatomy Knowledge in the Veterinary Pre-clinical Curriculum

“…[10][11][12][14][15][16][17] Despite the evidence that a cadaveric dissection-based approach offers superior understanding of clinically-relevant anatomy and surgical techniques, the depth and duration of teaching anatomical content is in decline. 2,4,14,18,19 This trend is of immense concern as it is likely to increase the gap between anatomical dissection skills required during the initial years of veterinary curriculum and the surgical skills required in an operating room in the clinical years. 1,2,4 Such gaps between the preclinical and clinical years may be unnecessary barriers in facilitating vertical integration in the veterinary curriculum.…”