With the changes introduced in medical curricula, many schools have reduced or omitted "dissection" and replaced it with other teaching and learning means such as computer-aided programs, 3-D models, plastinated specimen, predissected specimen, anatomy atlases, etc.
My question is, do you still have "dissection" as part of the teaching, and learning anatomy or you have replaced "dissection" with other teaching means?
We still have dissection in our curriculum, but with the current curriculum dissection is much reduced. We do however have an elective for 4th year students in which we dissect the whole body and relate the variations we find to clinical conditions. After teaching anatomy for more than 30 years I still feel strongly that a substantial dissection course should be included in first and second year medicine. Students who claim to learn anatomy soley by digital means are missing out on several fronts. On cadavers we actually get to see in 3 real dimensions anatomical variations related to clinical conditions. The cadaver lab is an exciting place, particulary when something unusual shows up, as it does every term. In our lab we recently saw a case of situs inversus. Each year we see one or more examples of the Artery of Death (aberrant obturator). Each year we see examples of cardiac bypass. A curriculum in which cadaver dissection is integrated with clinical learning is a strong curriculum.
As for exams I feel medical student exams should include a practical anatomy test on cadavers. There is a difference between playing with digital toys and learning clinical anatomy.
Hi,
There are so much debate about this issue since we have so much donation to our school so, our department still is interested in teaching anatomy to medical student on the cadaver although simultaneously we are using videos and training aid tools. I know it is also happening in the Japan, Iran and Yale in US.
Masoumeh
We still have dissection in our curriculum, but with the current curriculum dissection is much reduced. We do however have an elective for 4th year students in which we dissect the whole body and relate the variations we find to clinical conditions. After teaching anatomy for more than 30 years I still feel strongly that a substantial dissection course should be included in first and second year medicine. Students who claim to learn anatomy soley by digital means are missing out on several fronts. On cadavers we actually get to see in 3 real dimensions anatomical variations related to clinical conditions. The cadaver lab is an exciting place, particulary when something unusual shows up, as it does every term. In our lab we recently saw a case of situs inversus. Each year we see one or more examples of the Artery of Death (aberrant obturator). Each year we see examples of cardiac bypass. A curriculum in which cadaver dissection is integrated with clinical learning is a strong curriculum.
As for exams I feel medical student exams should include a practical anatomy test on cadavers. There is a difference between playing with digital toys and learning clinical anatomy.
Great reply Dr Vriend. I agree with what you have observed about learning anatomy. Even “virtual reality“ goggles will not fully replace the real 3-D. A combination of methods, including films, seems best.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Anatomy