A Comparative Analysis of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Students’ Perceptions of Anatomy Education Across Different Academic Year Levels

Abstract

A Comparative Analysis of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Students’ Perceptions of Anatomy Education Across Different Academic Year Levels

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare physiotherapy and rehabilitation students’ opinions on anatomy education at different undergraduate stages and reveal differences in awareness. Material and Methods: This study was carried out on Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Term 1 (n=51) and Term 4 (n=58) students. Students' opinions about anatomy education were recorded with a Google Forms questionnaire, and the data was compared. Results: 86.27% of Term I and 79.31% of Term IV students in the study stated they preferred the physiotherapy and rehabilitation department willingly. The proportion of Term I students who strongly agreed with the statement ‘It is sufficient to have anatomy education only in the first year’ was higher than that of Term IV students (p<0.001). The proportion of Term IV students who strongly agreed with the statement ‘Anatomy courses should continue in the following years to support clinical knowledge’ and agreed with the statement ‘I benefit from the programs on the internet during the anatomy education process’ was higher than that of Term I students (p=0.010; p=0.016). Conclusion: Our results indicate that students’ perceptions of anatomy education differ across academic years, with a growing emphasis on the value of integrating anatomical knowledge with clinical practice.

Keywords

• anatomy
• education
• physiotherapy
• students'opinion

References

1. Dayal M, Owens J, Gibson W, Strkalj G. Anatomical knowledge retention in physiotherapy students: A preliminary assessment. IJAR 2017;5(1):3474-479.
2. Ojukwu CP, Anyanwu EG, Onyebuchi CB, Uchenwoke CI, Okemuo AJ, Okafor CJ, et al. Anatomy education in physiotherapy training: perceptions of Nigerian-based undergraduate physiotherapy students. Physical Therapy Reviews 2022;27(1):60-67.
3. Shead D, Roos R, Olivier B, Ihunwo AO. Gross anatomy curricula and pedagogical approaches for undergraduate physiotherapy students: A scoping review protocol. JBI Evid Synth 2016;14(10):98-104.
4. Shead DA, Roos R, Olivier B, Ihunwo AO. Curricular and pedagogical aspects of gross anatomy education for undergraduate physiotherapy students: a scoping review. JBI Evid Synth 2020;18(5):893-951.
5. Mutluay ŞD, Açıkgöz AK. Öğrenci ebe ve hemşirelerin anatomi eğitimi hakkındaki görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi 2020;10(2):201-208.
6. Triepels CP, Koppes DM, Van Kuijk SM, Popeijus HE, Lamers WH, Van Gorp T et al. Medical students’ perspective on training in anatomy. Ann Anat 2018;217:60-65.
7. Duman F, Huzmeli I, Yucekaya B, Hallaceli H, Gunes M. Importance of anatomy education in physical therapy and rehabilitation in Turkey: A qualitative study. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences 2017;4(4):64-71.
8. Bozer C, Kose KC. The Opinions of Physiotherapists With And Without Training in Manual Therapy on Undergraduate Anatomy Education: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study. ESFAM 2023;12(2):55-62.

9. Kelly D, Hoang TN, Reinoso M, Joukhadar Z, Clements T, Vetere F. Augmented reality learning environment for physiotherapy education. Physical Therapy Reviews 2018;23(1):21-28.
10. Arı İ, Şendemir E. Anatomi eğitimi üzerine öğrenci görüşleri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2003;29(2):11-14.
11. Çetkin M, Turhan B, Bahşi İ, Kervancıoğlu P. Tıp fakültesi öğrencilerinin anatomi eğitimi hakkındaki düşünceleri. Gaziantep Medical Journal 2016;22(2):82-88.
12. Karabilgin ÖS, Şahin H. Eğitim Etkinliğini Değerlendirmede Öğrenci Geri Bildiriminin Kullanımı. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası 2006;21(21):27-33.
13. Estai M, Bunt S. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical review. Ann Anat 2016; 208:151-157.
14. Waterston SW, Stewart IJ. Survey of clinicians' attitudes to the anatomical teaching and knowledge of medical students. Clin Anat 2005;18(5):380-384.
15. Bergman EM, Van Der Vleuten CP, Scherpbier AJ. Why don’t they know enough about anatomy?. A narrative review. Med Teach 2011;33(5):403-409.
16. Kundakcı YE, Bilir A. Opinions of physiotherapy students on the effect of anatomy education in clinical practice course: A preliminary study. Hamidiye Med J 2023;4(2):92-102.
17. Polat S, Sönmez EI, Tunç M, Isik EI, Özsahin E, Göker P. Anatomy Education at Vocational Schools of Health Sciences. Int J Morphol 2024; 42(6):1488-1496.
18. Bergman EM, Prince KJ, Drukker J, van der Vleuten CP, Scherpbier AJ. How much anatomy is enough? Anat Sci Educ 2008;1(4):184-188.
19. Özdinçler A, Tarakçı E, Aslan Y. Fizyoterapi ve rehabilitasyon bölümü öğrencilerinin mesleki farkındalık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Sağlık Bilimleri ve Meslekleri Dergisi 2015;2(2):217-222.
20. Turhan B. Physiotherapy and rehabilitation students’ opinions on anatomy education: a cross-sectional survey study. Physiotherapy Quarterly 2020;28(2):46-51.
21. Turhan B, Kocamaz D. Importance of anatomy education on electrotherapy lectures in physiotherapy and rehabilitation curricula: Student perceptions of a foundation university. Med Sci Educ 2021;31(5):1669-1675.
22. Langfield T, Colthorpe K, Ainscough L. Online instructional anatomy videos: Student usage, self‐efficacy, and performance in upper limb regional anatomy assessment. Anat Sci Educ 2018;11(5):461-470.
23. Burhonova G. Addressing Students’ Lack of Latin Knowledge in Medical Terminology. IJRISS 2024;8(11):2016-2025.
24. Yammine K. The current status of anatomy knowledge: where are we now? Where do we need to go and how do we get there?. Teach Learn Med 2014;26(2):184-188.