Comparison of the effect of teaching anatomy between traditional methods and teaching by virtual dissecting table on the learning of medical students of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences

Abstract

Background: Anatomy is fundamental in medical education, enabling students to identify and locate organs. Its teaching heavily relies on models and cadavers, but inadequate infrastructure and equipment present challenges. Traditional anatomy education methods include cadaveric dissection and illustration. While dissection is interactive but costly, illustration remains low-cost and engaging. Cadaveric surgery effectively teaches surgical anatomy through hands-on practice but is resource-intensive, making it more suitable for postgraduate education. New technologies like simulation, VR, AR, and MR enhance anatomical education for students by providing a safe, interactive learning environment, reducing errors, and decreasing reliance on cadavers. This study explores virtual dissecting tables in teaching anatomy to medical students.

Method and Material: visualization device "kalbodnama," procured from Rayan Teb Pishgam (now VIVO SANAL EĞİTİM TEKNOLOJİLERİ), was assessed. Students were divided into two groups. Group One used a virtual dissecting table and physical models (bones, mannequins, or cadavers) to practice theoretical topics, and subsequently participated in a post-test to evaluate their progress. In this study at Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, the effectiveness of the anatomical. The first student group used both real bones and a Virtual dissecting table for learning, while the second group only used real bones. After practice, both groups took a post-test. Group two (control): Students practiced course material using bones, models, or cadavers without a Virtual dissecting table and then took a post-test. Both groups took a pre-test before practical sessions .

Results: Using an anatomical visualization device in osteology significantly improves post-test scores in medicine and dentistry compared to traditional teaching methods. For medical students, the average scores of pre-tests and post-tests on soft tissue topics show no significant difference with or without using an anatomical visualization device. However, dental students exhibit a significant improvement in scores between pre-tests and post-tests, especially when the anatomical visualization device is used. This improvement is particularly notable and significant after using the visualization tool. Dental students performed better on pre-tests related to osteology compared to soft tissue topics. In post-tests without using the anatomy visualization device, scores for soft tissue topics were higher, reflecting greater interest in these topics. However, when the device was used, scores for osteology were higher, highlighting the significant role of the anatomy visualization device in teaching osteology to students.

Conclusion: The results from pre-tests and post-tests of medical and dental students indicate that practical class training enhances their knowledge in osteology and soft tissue anatomy, whether using a virtual cadaver or not. However, training with the virtual cadaver significantly improves student scores and deepens their learning. Some non-significant differences in pre-test and post-test scores suggest a need to revisit and improve the practical training methods.