Medical students' reactions to anatomic dissection and the phenomenon of cadaver naming

Abstract

The teaching of gross anatomy has, for centuries, relied on the dissection of human cadavers, and this formative experience is known to evoke strong emotional responses. The authors hypothesized that the phenomenon of cadaver naming is a coping mechanism used by medical students and that it correlates with other attitudes about dissection and body donation. The authors developed a 33-question electronic survey to which 1,156 medical students at 12 medical schools in the United States voluntarily responded (November 2011-March 2012). They also surveyed course directors from each institution regarding their curricula and their observations of students' coping mechanisms. The majority of students (574, 67.8%) named their cadaver. Students most commonly cited the cadaver's age as the reason they chose a particular name for the cadaver. A minority of the students who did not name the cadaver reported finding the practice of naming disrespectful. Almost all students indicated that they would have liked to know more about their donor, particularly his or her medical history. Finally, students who knew the birth name of the donor used it less frequently than predicted. The authors found that the practice of naming cadavers is extremely prevalent among medical students and that inventive naming serves as a beneficial coping mechanism. The authors suggest that developing a method of providing students with more information about their cadaver while protecting the anonymity of the donor and family would be useful.

Reflective journals: unmasking student perceptions of anatomical education

“…In this study, students took it upon themselves to name the cadaver, thereby connecting emotionally with the donor (3.7%). This concurs with that reported by Williams et al [93], who stated that the practice of naming cadavers is an extremely prevalent occurrence among medical students and that this sort of inventive naming serves as a beneficial coping mechanism. Naming "allows students to acknowledge the cadaver's personhood, while psychologically shielding themselves enough to be comfortable with the dissection" [93].…”

“…This concurs with that reported by Williams et al [93], who stated that the practice of naming cadavers is an extremely prevalent occurrence among medical students and that this sort of inventive naming serves as a beneficial coping mechanism. Naming "allows students to acknowledge the cadaver's personhood, while psychologically shielding themselves enough to be comfortable with the dissection" [93]. Our study also highlighted an urgent need to know, in the form of curiosity, details regarding the life of the donor (18.9%), concurring with that reported by Fitzgerald [26].…”

Anonymous body or first patient? A status report and needs assessment regarding the personalization of donors in dissection courses in German, Austrian, and Swiss Medical Schools

“…Students thought that empathy could be increased by providing information on the donor's motivation for body donation. In contrast to Williams et al (), neither students nor anatomy departments saw any positive effect in providing a fictitious name. Indeed, both target groups feared that providing a name would create greater psychological stress.…”

“…But anatomy departments have also begun a paradigm shift in the Anglo‐American sphere by “de‐anonymizing” body donors to “give them back their identity” (Vannatta and Crow, ; Crow et al, ; Bohl et al, ; Talarico, ). Many authors have described different teaching methods that approach the subject of de‐anonymization, such as utilizing video messages from an individual body donor to be seen by the students who will dissect his or her body, as well as meetings with family members of the donor, and the use of a fictitious donor name (Williams et al, ). Jones and King mentioned alternatives to the anonymization of the body donor, such as the non‐identification of the donor in combination with the provision of additional information (Jones and King, ).…”

Redeeming dissection course for medical undergraduates by compact structured schedules and frequent in-course-assessments

“…The teaching of gross anatomy has, for centuries, relied on the dissection of human cadavers 1 . Past research suggests that students find work on a cadaver to be distressing, but also rewarding 2 .…”