An assessment of the anatomical knowledge of laypersons and their attitudes towards the clinical importance of gross anatomy in medicine

Abstract

If it is accepted that increasingly we live within a consumerist society then axiomatically 'ownership' of medical training does not belong to political authorities (whether governmental or medical), nor to the medical profession, nor indeed to the teachers, educationalists and even the students but to the laypersons in society who are patients or potential patients (viz. the clients/recipients of medical care). As yet, however, there has been no attempt to evaluate how much anatomy laypersons know and what their attitudes are towards the importance of anatomy in medicine. By means of a questionnaire, we have conducted a survey of laypersons' attitudes to anatomy in the U.K. and France. Results suggest that, regardless of gender, age, socioeconomic groupings, level of education, or in the presence of some cultural differences between the U.K. and France, laypersons have a reasonable understanding and knowledge of gross anatomy (being weakest on understanding function) and have strong beliefs that gross anatomy is crucial for medical education, holding the view that the medical profession's esteem would be diminished if anatomy were not a significant part of the medical curriculum and if human cadaveric material was not employed in medical training. Thus, laypersons' perceptions about the importance of gross anatomy should be factored into the organisation of medical training, not just to provide important information and skills for future medical/surgical practitioners, but also to help maintain the esteem of the medical profession.

A core syllabus for the teaching of gross anatomy of the thorax to medical students

“…While 130 hr may seem a significant amount of time, in the context of the entire medical course, this corresponds merely with 3 full weeks of anatomy tuition in a year or 2% of the entire course. These changes are occurring despite anatomists, medical students and laypersons opining that gross anatomy is crucial and fundamental for medical education and training (e.g., Patel and Moxham, , ; Moxham and Plaisant, ; Moxham and Moxham, ; Pabst, ; Kerby et al, ; Moxham et al, ). Globally, the range and variety of medical curricula have changed markedly from the traditional model of 2 or 3 years “preclinical studies” followed by 2 or 3 years of “clinical studies” to systems‐based integrated curricula.…”

A core syllabus for the teaching of embryology and teratology to medical students

“…As previously mentioned, we live in a consumerist world where the consumer expects to have an input into matters that concern them (and what can be more concerning than healthcare). Recently, we published a article where we surveyed the opinions of laypersons in the UK and France about their attitudes toward the importance of the anatomical sciences (Moxham et al, 2016). We found that the laypersons (i.e., patients or future patients) had an unexpectedly high knowledge of anatomy and we also discovered that they expressed very strong views about the relevance of anatomy and of the importance of students studying anatomy using cadavers.…”

The questions that are asked are as important as the methods that are used and the data that are collected!: Some comments relating to the paper by Wilson et al., A meta‐analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies

“…In this respect, laypersons in the U.K. and in France (i.e., the consumers of healthcare) were in favor of high levels of training in anatomy. Additionally, they evinced a critical loss of esteem for the medical profession when made aware that students no longer dissected (Moxham et al, 2016). I very much hope that, when it comes to advocating the importance of our discipline, my suspicions that anatomists are too often their own worst enemy prove to be unfounded.…”