Benefits of extracurricular participation in dissection in a prosection‐based medical anatomy program

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extracurricular cadaveric dissection program available to medical students at an institution with a modern (time-compressed, student-centered, and prosection-based) approach to medical anatomy education. Quantitative (Likert-style questions) and qualitative data (thematic analysis of open-ended commentary) were collated from a survey of three medical student cohorts who had completed preclerkship. Perceived benefits of dissection included the hands-on learning style and the development of anatomy expertise, while the main barrier that limited participation was the time-intensive nature of dissection. Despite perceived benefits, students preferred that dissection remain optional. Analysis of assessments for the MD2016 cohort revealed that dissection participation was associated with enhanced performance on anatomy items in each systems-based unit examination, with the largest benefits observed on discriminating items that assessed knowledge application. In conclusion, this study revealed that there are academic and perceived benefits of extracurricular participation in dissection. While millennial medical students recognized these benefits, these students also indicated strong preference for having flexibility and choice in their anatomy education, including the choice to participate in cadaveric dissection. Anat Sci Educ 11: 294-302. © 2017 American Association of Anatomists.

National Survey on Canadian Undergraduate Medical Programs: The Decline of the Anatomical Sciences in Canadian Medical Education

“…The report, however, did not elaborate on hours of teaching in the anatomic sciences. Further, while two articles by Whelan et al give extremely detailed data on anatomy education in the University of Ottawa Medical Program and how the adoption of a compressed prosection‐based curriculum (Whelan et al, 2016) was enhanced by the extracurricular dissection (Whelan et al, 2018), these studies do not discuss the Canadian situation in general. Overall, combined North American and American‐specific data suggest a decrease in the role of anatomy in medical education (Collins et al, 1994) and a shift to a more integrated curriculum in both Canada and the United States (Kitzes et al, 2007; Kirsh and Aron, 2008; Wilkerson et al, 2009).…”

Dissection versus Prosection: A Comparative Assessment of the Course Experiences, Approaches to Learning, and Academic Performance of Non‐medical Undergraduate Students in Human Anatomy

“…Other research has concluded that dissection offers stronger benefits to anatomical knowledge development (Pizzimenti et al, 2016; Thompson and Marshall, 2020) and that many students consider it necessary for their learning (Mwachaka et al, 2016; Flack and Nicholson, 2018). Accordingly, there is still no clear consensus on which approach is optimal for human anatomy education (Winkelmann, 2007; Whelan et al, 2018; Wilson et al, 2018; Kinirons et al, 2019; Thompson and Marshall, 2020).…”

Creating a Human Gross Anatomy Laboratory: The Experience at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution

“…As a final note to underscore the importance of sustainability, examples from the past decade have demonstrated that removal of cadaveric dissection from the curriculum is often transient and, for myriad reasons, has resulted in reinstatement of dissection or, otherwise, provisions that allow students an option of a dissection-based course (Rizzolo and Stewart, 2006;Azer and Eizenberg, 2007;Moxham and Plaisant, 2007;Ghosh, 2017;Pais et al, 2017;Eppler et al, 2018;Whelan et al, 2018). So, if cadaveric dissection is not sustained, it will likely be missed when it is gone.…”