https://www.ijmhr.org/ijar.htm editor_anatomy@ijmhr.org
ISSN:       2321-4281 (E) 2321-8967 (P)

IJAR.2019.102

DOWNLOAD PDF
Table of Contents

Type of Article:  Original

Volume 7; Issue 1.3 (March 2019)

Page No.: 6292-6297

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2019.102

DISSECTION: BEFORE OR AFTER LECTURE IS EFFECTIVE IN TEACHING ANATOMY: PERCEPTION OF UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS

Siva Sree Ranga. M.K.

Associate Professor, Department of  Anatomy, Sree Mookambika Institute of Medical Sciences, Kulasekharam, India.

Corresponding author: Dr.Siva Sree Ranga.M.K; Siva Sree Sadanam, Vellarada, Thiruvanathapuram District, Kerala, India. E-Mail: dr.sivasreeranga@gmail.com

ABSTRACT:

Background: In Undergraduate Medical Education, understanding  Anatomy is the basic step  for studying other branches of Medical Science. Traditionally Gross Anatomy  has been taught by lectures and cadaveric dissection. Currently no particular format is being followed in understanding  Anatomy using  Lecture classes and Dissection of particular organ or body area. This research work has been planned to find the more  effective method of teaching/learning Gross Anatomy using lecture and cadaveric dissection.

Objectives: 1. To compare  ‘Lecture after cadaveric Dissection’ of body parts  and  ‘Dissection after Lecture’ as an effective method  for  comprehension of Anatomy 2. To find the perception of the study participants regarding Lecture after cadaveric dissection  and dissection after lecture as  a better method  for  understanding Anatomy

Methodology: Quasi experimental  study  was conducted among MBBS Students of 2016 batch posted in the department of Anatomy, Dr.SMCSI Medical College, Karakonam, Thiruvananthapuram district, Kerala, India  during the period of 5 months from  April  2018. Post procedural  test scores  for ‘Dissection after Lecture’  was compared with that for  ‘Lecture after Dissection’. Perception  of the study participants  on the two learning procedures was  studied by a Likert-type questionnaire

Results: Post procedural  test scores were calculated and compared between ‘Dissection after Lecture’  and  ‘Lecture after Dissection’ using  Unpaired  ‘t’ test. ‘Lecture after dissection’ was found to be a better method than Dissection after Lecture (’t’ 39.536;26.128; P < 0.001) in teaching/learning Anatomy. Students felt  that the method of  ‘Lecture  after Dissection’  helped in better Cognitive gain, Easiness in learning, Retention of memory, Drawing diagrams, and in Securing higher marks.

Conclusion: ‘Lecture after dissection’ was found to show higher post procedural  test scores than ‘Dissection after Lecture’ and this difference was  statistically significant. Perception  of the study participants about the two learning methods was  studied and ‘Lecture after dissection’ was found  to be the  better teaching learning method  that reflected positive perceptions.

Key words: Cadaveric Dissection, Lecture, Perception.

REFERENCES

  1. Brandon Michael Henrya, Krzysztof A. Tomaszewski, Jerzy A. Walocha. Methods of Evidence-Based Anatomy: a guide to conducting systematic reviews and meta-analysis of anatomical studies. Annals of Anatomy 2016;205:16–21.
  2. Heylings DJ. Anatomy 1999-2000: the curriculum, who teaches it and how? Med Educ. 2002;36:702–710.
  3. National Informatics Centre. Kerala University of Health Sciences. http://14.139.185.154/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=201&Itemid=140
  4. Weeks SE, Harris EE, Kinzey WG. Human gross anatomy: a crucial time to encourage respect and compassion in students. Clin Anat. 1995; 8:69–79.
  5. Esther M. Bergman. Discussing dissection in anatomy education Perspectives on Medial  Educ 2015 Oct; 4(5): 211–213.Published online 2015 Sep 10. doi:  10.1007/40037-015-0207-73.
  6. Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ. 2007;41:15–22.
  7. Azer SA, Eizenberg N. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first- and second-year students. SurgRadiol Anat. 2007; 29:173–180.
  8. Ajita R, Singh Y I. Body donation and it’s relevance in Anatomy learning – A Review. Journal of Anatomical Society of India 2007;56:44-7.
  9. Von Staden H. The discovery of the body: human dissection and it’s cultural contexts in ancient Greece. Yale J Biol Med 1992;65:223-41.
  10. Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Re 2002;269:20- 32.
  11. Lock DG. Biomedicine Examined. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988. P. 125-54. 7.
  12. Ellis H. Teaching in the dissecting room. Clin Anat 2001;14:149-51.
  13. Zehra U, Athar Z, Hafeez A, Rizvi F. Is the use of PowerPoint presentations a better tool of understanding gross anatomy than cadaveric dissection? Ann Pak Inst Med Sci. 2012;8:6–10.
  14. Joughin G. A short guide to oral assessment. Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University; 2010.
  15. MacKenzie L. Occupational therapy students as peer assessors in viva examinations. Assess Eval High Educ. 2000;25: 135–147.

Cite this article: Siva Sree Ranga. M.K. DISSECTION: BEFORE OR AFTER LECTURE IS EFFECTIVE IN TEACHING ANATOMY: PERCEPTION OF UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS. Int J Anat Res 2019;7(1.3):6292-6297. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2019.102