{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Multidimensional Learning Tools in Anatomy: A Randomized Control Trial.","authors":"Sudha Rani, Govind Kumar Gupta, Ratnajeet Chakraborty, Tushar Kumar, Mani Kishlay Kumar, Anil Kumar Das, Shashank Shekhar","doi":"10.4103/aam.aam_214_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Anatomy teaching has traditionally been based on dissection. However, reduced hours in total and laboratory hours in gross anatomy along with a dearth of cadavers have ensued the search for a less time-consuming tool.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study was conducted in the Department of Anatomy in Sheikh Bhikhari Medical College, Hazaribag. A total of 282 medical students were taught gross anatomy, using three different learning modalities: dissection (n = 95), plastic models (n = 94), and three-dimensional (3D) anatomy software (n = 93). The knowledge of the students was examined by 100 multiple-choice question (MCQ) and tag questions followed by an evaluation questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When performance is considered, the dissection and 3D group performed better than the plastic models group in total, MCQs, and tag questions. In the evaluation questionnaire, dissection performed better than the other two modalities. Moreover, dissection and 3D software emerged as superior to the plastic models group.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis: </strong>All data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA and t-test. Group-based analysis by ANOVA and gender-based analysis were done by Student's t-test. A comparison of students' perceptions was done by Kruskal-Wallis H-test.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Dissection remains a favorite with students and accomplishes a significantly higher attainment of knowledge. Plastic models are less effective but are a valuable tool in preparation for cadaveric laboratories.</p>","PeriodicalId":7938,"journal":{"name":"Annals of African Medicine","volume":"23 3","pages":"459-465"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11364337/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of African Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aam.aam_214_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Anatomy teaching has traditionally been based on dissection. However, reduced hours in total and laboratory hours in gross anatomy along with a dearth of cadavers have ensued the search for a less time-consuming tool.
Materials and methods: The study was conducted in the Department of Anatomy in Sheikh Bhikhari Medical College, Hazaribag. A total of 282 medical students were taught gross anatomy, using three different learning modalities: dissection (n = 95), plastic models (n = 94), and three-dimensional (3D) anatomy software (n = 93). The knowledge of the students was examined by 100 multiple-choice question (MCQ) and tag questions followed by an evaluation questionnaire.
Results: When performance is considered, the dissection and 3D group performed better than the plastic models group in total, MCQs, and tag questions. In the evaluation questionnaire, dissection performed better than the other two modalities. Moreover, dissection and 3D software emerged as superior to the plastic models group.
Statistical analysis: All data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA and t-test. Group-based analysis by ANOVA and gender-based analysis were done by Student's t-test. A comparison of students' perceptions was done by Kruskal-Wallis H-test.
Conclusion: Dissection remains a favorite with students and accomplishes a significantly higher attainment of knowledge. Plastic models are less effective but are a valuable tool in preparation for cadaveric laboratories.
期刊介绍:
The Annals of African Medicine is published by the Usmanu Danfodiyo University Teaching Hospital, Sokoto, Nigeria and the Annals of African Medicine Society. The Journal is intended to serve as a medium for the publication of research findings in the broad field of Medicine in Africa and other developing countries, and elsewhere which have relevance to Africa. It will serve as a source of information on the state of the art of Medicine in Africa, for continuing education for doctors in Africa and other developing countries, and also for the publication of meetings and conferences. The journal will publish articles I any field of Medicine and other fields which have relevance or implications for Medicine.