Student Opinions on the Effect of Three Dimensional Digital Software Programs for Showing Human Anatomy on Anatomy Education

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 35 - 39, 01.01.2021

Erengül Boduç

https://doi.org/10.19127/bshealthscience.829835

Cited By: 2

Öz

The aim of this article is to investigate the effect of three-dimensional digital images on anatomy education through student views. The data collection form prepared with a five-point Likert test was sent to the first and second year students of the Kafkas University Medicine Faculty on the web. 133 students in total answered the questions. When the answers given to the questions were examined, it was observed that there was a significant difference between the answers given by the first and second graders in the third (P=0.013) and ninth (P=0.002) questions (P<0.05). It is thought that the results and opinions obtained from the study will guide the future of anatomy education. Thanks to the student views, it is expected that the study will raise awareness among educators.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Human Anatomy, Cadaver, Digital software programs, Likert test

Proje Numarası

yok

Kaynakça

• Bahsi I, Topal Z, Cetkin M, Orhan M, Kervancioglu P, Odabasioglu ME, Cihan OF. 2020. Evaluation of attitudes and opinions of medical faculty students against the use of cadaver in anatomy education and investigation of the factors affecting their emotional responses related thereto. Surg Radiol Anat, DOI: 10.1007/s00276-020-02567-8.
• Balta JY, Cryan JF, O'Mahony SM. 2019. The antimicrobial capacity of embalming solutions: a comparative study. J App Microbiol, 126(3): 764-770.
• Biasutto SN, Caussa LI, Criado del Rio LE. 2006. Teaching anatomy: cadavers vs. computers? Ann Anat, 188(2):187-190.
• Cornwall, J, Stringer MD. 2009. The wider importance of cadavers: Educational and research diversity from a body bequest program. Anatomical Sci Educ, 2(5): 234-237.
• Estai M, Bunt S. 2016. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical Rev Ann Anat, 208:151-157.
• Granger NA. 2004. Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist: An Official Pub American Assoc Anatomists, 281(1): 6-8.
• Gunderman RB, Wilson PK. 2005. Viewpoint: exploring the human interior: the roles of cadaver dissection and radiologic imaging in teaching anatomy. Acad Med, 80(8): 745-749.
• Hoyek N, Collet C, Di Rienzo F, De Almeida M, Guillot A. 2014. Effectiveness of three-dimensional digital animation in teaching human anatomy in an authentic classroom context. Anat Sci Educ, 7(6): 430-437.
• Kharb P, Samanta PP. 2016. Blended learning approach for teaching and learning anatomy: Students’ and teachers’ perspective. J Anatomical Society of India, 65(1): 43-47.
• Kotze SH, Mole CG, Greyling LM. 2012. The translucent cadaver: an evaluation of the use of full body digital X-ray images and drawings in surface anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ, 5(5): 287-294.
• Lazarus MD, Chinchilli VM, Leong SL, Kauffman Jr GL. 2012. Perceptions of anatomy: Critical components in the clinical setting. Anat Sci Educ, 5(4): 187-199.
• Lewis TL, Burnett B, Tunstall RG, Abrahams PH. 2014. Complementing anatomy education using three-dimensional anatomy mobile software applications on tablet computers. Clin Anat, 27(3): 313-320.
• McLachlan JC, Bligh J, Bradley P, Searle J. 2004. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med Educ, 38(4): 418-424.
• Murgitroyd E, Madurska M, Gonzalez J, Watson A. 2015. 3D digital anatomy modelling–practical or pretty? The Surgeon, 13(3): 177-180.
• Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell W RJ, Daniel S. J. 2006. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer‐generated three‐dimensional anatomical ear model. Medical Educ, 40(11): 1081-1087.
• Older J. 2004. Anatomy: a must for teaching the next generation. Surgeon, 2(2): 79-90.
• Peker T, Gülekon N, Tatar I, Sarıkcıoğlu L, Kachlik D. 2012. Three-dimensional imaging and modeling of anatomic structures, sectional and radiological anatomy, and staining techniques. Anat Res Int, 2012: 1-2.
• Pereira JA, Pleguezuelos E, Merí A, Molina‐Ros A, Molina‐Tomás MC, Masdeu C. 2007. Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Medical Educ, 41(2): 189-195.
• Saltarelli AJ, Roseth CJ, Saltarelli WA. 2014. Human cadavers vs. multimedia simulation: A study of student learning in anatomy. Anat Sci Educ, 7(5): 331-339.
• Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. 2010. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ, 3(2): 83-93.
• Tan S, Hu A, Wilson T, Ladak H, Haase P, Fung K. 2012. Role of a computer-generated three-dimensional laryngeal model in anatomy teaching for advanced learners. J Laryngology and otology, 126(4): 395.
• Ten Brinke, B Klitsie PJ, Timman R, Busschbach JJ, Lange JF, Kleinrensink GJ. 2014. Anatomy education and classroom versus laparoscopic dissection-based training: a randomized study at one medical school. Acad Med, 89(5): 806-810.
• Theoret CL, Carmel ÉN, Bernier S. 2007. Why dissection videos should not replace cadaver prosections in the gross veterinary anatomy curriculum: Results from a comparative study. J Vet Med Educ, 34(2): 151-156.
• Turhan B. 2020. Physiotherapy and rehabilitation students’ opinions on anatomy education: a cross-sectional survey study. Physiotherapy Quart, 28(2): 46-51.
• Triepels CP, Smeets CF, Notten KJ, Kruitwagen RF, Futterer JJ, Vergeldt TF, Van Kuijk SM. 2020. Does three‐dimensional anatomy improve student understanding? Clinical Anat, 33(1): 25-33.