Effects of an alternate dissection schedule on gross anatomy laboratory practical performance

Abstract

The current medical curricula reform that is taking place in many medical schools throughout the world has resulted in less time for gross anatomy laboratory instruction. In response, anatomists are using a variety of approaches (e.g., peer teaching, prosections, plastinated anatomical models, etc.) to adapt to these changes. To accommodate recent curricular reform at the University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine, an alternating dissection schedule was implemented. The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of the alternating schedule on gross anatomy laboratory practical performance. Using a Mann-Whitney Rank Sum test, back and upper limb (back-upper limb), and lower extremity laboratory practical performance for students who dissected in every laboratory (EL group; n = 227) is compared to students who dissected in every other laboratory (EOL group; n = 254). For the back-upper limb part of the anatomy laboratory practical, the mean percentage scores for the EL and EOL groups were 74.5% and 68.1%, respectively (P < 0.001). The mean percentage scores for the EL and EOL groups on the lower limb portion of the anatomy lab practical were 75.9% and 75.6%, respectively (P = 0.994). These data suggest that the use of an alternating dissection schedule had an equivocal effect on the students' gross anatomy laboratory practical performance for these two sections. The reasons for these conflicting results may have been related to regional complexity or volume of information, and the sequence in which the regions were taught.