Reflection of the Type of Medical Curriculum on Its Anatomy Content: Trial to Improve the Anatomy Learning Outcomes

Abstract

Doctors without anatomy are like a blind that deceives the road in the desert. Traditionalists perceive a decline in Anatomy knowledge and attribute it to the modern methods of teaching and learning. Reformers point to evidence that modern approaches offer equivalent results in assessment when compared to traditional courses. It seems that there are three aspects that need to be resolved: when, how much, and how to teach anatomy. In this study we reviewed more than 80 articles to conclude some guidelines which can help in improving anatomy learning outcomes in different medical curricula. Conclusions: We concluded that the challenge should not be to determine supremacy of one methodology over another but to maximize the learning benefit available from the different methods. In any model of medical curricula, a professional team of medical anatomists have to share in all the steps of curriculum building, the assessment tools and the final evaluation till the approval of the curriculum to: 1-Ensure that all the basic anatomical objectives are chronologically arranged and sufficiently covered in a suitable time and methodology without inflation of the curriculum by more sophisticated details which taught only for the postgraduate students and medical anatomists. 2-Prevent any restriction of important basic knowledge which will not be covered later on and will affect the physician medical practice. 3-Ensure that all the basic anatomical objectives are demonstrated with their clinical application without the sophisticated details of the clinical points which will be taught in details in the clinical years.

Perceptions of South African academic instructors toward the teaching and learning of anatomy

“…In South Africa, a national core curriculum for anatomical education is non-existent and each University is responsible for its own anatomy curriculum. This creates a wide diversity in the modes of teaching within human anatomy departments with varying emphasis on the different methods individually or in combination [14], resulting in different curricula, different teaching time allocations, staffing numbers and composition. If a core curriculum were in place, both basic and clinical teachers would be cognisant of what students are expected to learn; thus assisting students to achieve that knowledge [2].…”

“…According to Fitzgerald et al [11] the time spent studying anatomy is worthless without quality teaching resources underpinning it. Traditionally, learning anatomy has been dissection-based [14]. South African anatomists strongly advocate the use of cadaver-based dissection as this modality allows haptic appreciation of 3D anatomy unlike any other teaching facility.…”

“…Anatomy has been the cornerstone of medical education for hundreds of years [14]. However, in the recent past, anatomical teaching has become a remarkably controversial area of medical education [11].…”

Friendship or vicarious relationship? Exploring the intricacies faced by basic sciences in integrated curricula

“…18,19 Also, it is a widely acknowledged fact that even with the guidance of core anatomy syllabus, educators still find it difficult to judge the level of anatomical details that should be taught to medical students. 20,21 It also mandates the pivotal role of clinicians' perspectives to support anatomy teaching, ensuring that anatomy is not taught to a high level of detail that is simply not required in the majority of clinical settings. 22 A recent study 22 highlighted that most participants perceived the need for revisiting cadaveric material at the beginning of each clinical placement and this would be helpful in integrating anatomy vertically as well.…”