Opinions of doctors and students regarding teaching aids used during human anatomy courses.

Abstract

Background: The human anatomy course is a fundamental subject in medical education. Understanding the structure and topography of the human body is essential for a doctor's career. High quality education for future doctors is key to the teaching process, and it requires adequate equipment to ensure a proper level of training, including the need to create several dissecting rooms to accommodate preserved specimens and whole corpses. It is also necessary to employ teaching, laboratory and technical staff with appropriate competences and experience. Various educational resources have been introduced recently to support anatomy education and enhance teaching, such as virtual anatomical tables and digital anatomical applications, which are already being used by some universities. However, the question remains: can these new methods replace traditional teaching ones? Should virtual experience prevail over cadaveric dissection on an anatomy course? The aim of this study was to gather opinions from doctors and medical students on the effectiveness of teaching human anatomy using anatomical preparations, cadaveric dissection, digital applications, and other resources to support the educational process.

Materials and methods: A total of 962 participants took part in the study, including 127 doctors (20 residents and interns) and 835 students (154 first year students and 681 second- to sixth-year students). The study employed a diagnostic survey method, using a questionnaire as the primary tool. In the section of the questionnaire where respondents were asked to evaluate educational resources for teaching human anatomy, they were asked to assess the effectiveness of learning through anatomical preparations, cadaveric dissection, and digital anatomical applications. The frequency of responses (in percentages) was calculated and differences between doctors and students were analysed using a chi-square test.

Results: Most respondents agreed that anatomical knowledge was important, both for other subjects in later years of medical studies, and for future professional work. This opinion was shared by both doctors and medical students. Similar proportions of respondents also considered anatomical preparations and human cadavers to be the most effective way to teach anatomy. Virtual programmes are seen as an interesting and useful additional teaching tool, but not as replacing hands-on experience in the form of dissection. This opinion was expressed by both doctors and medical students.

Conclusions: Knowledge of human anatomy is a basic requirement for doctors, and the skills acquired through practical classes using anatomical preparations and post mortems are extremely important. Digital anatomical programs are useful as an additional resource in the educational process, but cannot replace dissection room classes where students gain hands-on experience on actual cadavers.