The LINDSAY Virtual Human Project: An immersive approach to anatomy and physiology

Abstract

The increasing number of digital anatomy teaching software packages challenges anatomy educators on how to best integrate these tools for teaching and learning. Realistically, there exists a complex interplay of design, implementation, politics, and learning needs in the development and integration of software for education, each of which may be further amplified by the somewhat siloed roles of programmers, faculty, and students. LINDSAY Presenter is newly designed software that permits faculty and students to model and manipulate three-dimensional anatomy presentations and images, while including embedded quizzes, links, and text-based content. A validated tool measuring impact across pedagogy, resources, interactivity, freedom, granularity, and factors outside the immediate learning event was used in conjunction with observation, field notes, and focus groups to critically examine the impact of attitudes and perceptions of all stakeholders in the early implementation of LINDSAY Presenter before and after a three-week trial period with the software. Results demonstrate that external, personal media usage, along with students' awareness of the need to apply anatomy to clinical professional situations drove expectations of LINDSAY Presenter. A focus on the software over learning, which can be expected during initial orientation, surprisingly remained after three weeks of use. The time-intensive investment required to create learning content is a detractor from user-generated content and may reflect the consumption nature of other forms of digital learning. Early excitement over new technologies needs to be tempered with clear understanding of what learning is afforded, and how these constructively support future application and integration into professional practice.

How comprehensive are research studies investigating the efficacy of technology‐enhanced learning resources in anatomy education? A systematic review

“…However, given the well documented change in approach to anatomy education, it is important that on the introduction of TEL resources a robust evaluation of efficacy is conducted. This desire has been longstanding with McLachlan and Patten commenting over a decade ago that the field of evaluation was “the single most desirable improvement in anatomy teaching” (McLachlan and Patten, ), and more recently Trelease () commenting that “e‐learning innovations in anatomical sciences education currently suffer from a scarcity of statistically reliable learning efficacy evidence .” Furthermore, and despite this desire, there remains only an emerging level of evaluation into both the short‐ and long‐term impact individual TEL resources have on student education (Tworek et al, ; Colliver and Cianciolo, ; Cook and Ellaway, ; Pickering and Joynes, ; Trelease, ; Pickering, ). Recently, some comprehensive studies have attempted to address this issue with a series of meta‐analyses detailing the impact optical and virtual microscopy, 3D visualization technologies, physical models, and laboratory pedagogies, have on anatomy education (Yammine and Violato, ; Wilson et al, ; Wilson et al, ).…”

Distance learning ects and flipped classroom in the anatomy learning: comparative study of the use of augmented reality, video and notes

“…Opting for Augmented Reality (AR) is justified by the evidence that, thanks to technological progress, it is ever more possible to achieve 3D models for Anatomy study [3, 4]. Nowadays, students are used to handling technologies like Internet, 3D video games, mobile phones, MP3 players, and other technological devices.…”

Cognitive load imposed by knobology may adversely affect learners' perception of utility in using ultrasonography to learn physical examination skills, but not anatomy

“…Ultrasound images of internal anatomical structures and the dynamic responses of these structures to physical examination maneuvers provide learners with direct and visual feedback at the bedside. However, difficulty in conceptualizing three‐dimensional spatial patterns in the human body remains a challenge for many learners (Sugand et al, ; Kerby et al, ; Tworek et al, ). Furthermore, image acquisition is a highly operator dependent skill (Stringer et al, ) and even image interpretation skills alone require basic requisite knowledge in ultrasound physics (Fakoya, ).…”