This review provides evidence in support of the use of alternatives to traditional teaching methods in anatomy, in particular, the use of CAI/CAL with a number of high quality, low risk of bias studies supporting this.

It has been demonstrated that a positive correlation exists between clinical knowledge and retained concepts in basic sciences. Studies have demonstrated a modest attrition of anatomy knowledge over time, which may be influenced by students' perceived importance of the basic sciences and the learning styles adopted. The aims of this study were to: (1) conduct a cross-sectional evaluation of the retention of anatomical knowledge in preclinical (second-year) and clinical (fifth-year) chiropractic students at Murdoch University; and (2) examine students' perceptions of factors that may influence their anatomy knowledge retention. Second- and fifth-year chiropractic students at Murdoch University were invited to participate in the study. Ninety-one students voluntarily participated. The Carpal Bone Test, previously utilized to determine the retention of anatomical knowledge, was utilized to determine the extent to which participants retained gross anatomy knowledge. Participants also completed a questionnaire specifically designed to identify the factors that may have influenced their retention of gross anatomy knowledge. A two-sided Pearson chi-square test of association was used to ascertain statistically significant differences in carpal bone retention and students' responses between the two cohorts. Seventy percent of the fifth-year (clinical) chiropractic students correctly identified all eight carpal bones compared to only six percent of second-year chiropractic students. The majority of participants in both cohorts believed that gross anatomy knowledge is of clinical importance. The use of mnemonics and the clinical application of anatomy knowledge were identified as factors that significantly influenced participants' gross anatomy knowledge retention within this study.

BackgroundAnatomy apps supplement traditional learning; however, it is unknown if their use can improve students’ outcome. The present study examined whether the use of anatomy apps improved student performance on a neuroanatomy assessment.MethodsSecond-year anatomy students, enrolled in a Bachelor of Science with Chiropractic Major program, were randomly allocated to experimental and control groups in July 2015. Students completed the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS). The experimental group had access to iPads with four anatomy apps for three weekly classes (1.5 h each). One week after the last class, students were assessed by an online 30-question neuroanatomy test. Linear regression was used to examine the association between test scores and app use, gender, previous anatomy unit score and SDLRS scores. Students’ views on apps were collected by focus group discussion immediately after the test.ResultsCompleted questionnaires were obtained from n = 25 control and n = 25 experimental students. There was no association between app use and neuroanatomy assessment score (B = 1.75, 95 % CI: -0.340-3.840, p = 0.099). Only previous anatomy unit score (B = 0.348, 95 % CI: 0.214-0.483, p < 0.001) affected neuroanatomy assessment scores. Students favored apps with clinical images and features including identification pins, sliding bars and rotatable 3D images.ConclusionsApp use did not enhance learning outcomes in a second-year anatomy unit.

No abstract

BackgroundThe development of clinical practice guidelines for managing spinal pain have been informed by a biopsychosocial framework which acknowledges that pain arises from a combination of psychosocial and biomechanical factors. There is an extensive body of evidence that has associated various psychosocial factors with an increased risk of experiencing persistent pain. Clinicians require instruments that are brief, easy to administer and score, and capable of validly identifying psychosocial factors. The pain diagram is potentially such an instrument. The aim of our study was to examine the association between pain diagram area and psychosocial factors.Methods183 adults, aged 20–85, with spinal pain were recruited. We administered a demographic checklist; pain diagram; 11-point Numerical Rating Scale assessing pain intensity; Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS); MOS 36 Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36); and the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ). Open source software, GIMP, was used to calculate the total pixilation area on each pain diagram. Linear regression was used to examine the relationship between pain diagram area and the following variables: age; gender; pain intensity; PCS total score; FABQ-Work scale score; FABQ-Activity scale score; and SF-36 Mental Health scale score.ResultsThere were no significant associations between pain diagram area and any of the clinical variables.ConclusionOur findings showed that that pain diagram area was not a valid measure to identify psychosocial factors. Several limitations constrained our results and further studies are warranted to establish if pain diagram area can be used assess psychosocial factors.