Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Comparative Analysis of Physical Therapy Anatomical Knowledge and Retention: Human Donor Dissection Versus Virtual Laboratory.
Helms, Jeb T; Johnson, Kristen M; Ball, Jamie L.
Afiliación
  • Helms JT; Jeb T. Helms is a clinical associate professor in the Doctor of Physical Therapy program at Northern Arizona University, Room 102, Building 066, Health Professions Building, 208 E Pine Knoll Drive, Flagstaff, AZ 86011 (jeb.helms@nau.edu). Please address all correspondence to Jeb Helms.
  • Johnson KM; Kristen M. Johnson is an associate professor and the director of curriculum and assessment in the College of Health and Society in the Doctor of Physical Therapy program at Hawaii Pacific University.
  • Ball JL; Jamie L. Ball is a research and dissertation faculty member at Grand Canyon University, College of Doctoral Studies Online.
J Phys Ther Educ ; 38(2): 107-115, 2024 Jun 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38758175
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Despite a long history of using human donor dissection (HDD) for physical therapy (PT) anatomy education, there are no PT guidelines that require HDD. The purpose of this quantitative causal-comparative study was to determine if Doctor of Physical Therapy students who used HDD had different grades both within anatomy and within courses that require retention and application of anatomical knowledge (kinesiology and a foundational musculoskeletal course) compared with those who used virtual 3-dimensional anatomical software (VAS). REVIEW OF LITERATURE Numerous factors affect the decision to use HDD within PT anatomy, and few PT studies have compared the effectiveness of VAS to HDD.

SUBJECTS:

All students who took anatomy in an entry-level PT program from 2018 to 2021 (232 total students, 115 who used HDD in 2018-2019 and 117 who used VAS in 2020-2021).

METHODS:

Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare anatomy grades (course, written examination, and practical examination) and future grades in kinesiology and a foundational musculoskeletal course for students who used HDD or VAS.

RESULTS:

Physical therapy students who used VAS had statistically significant higher anatomy course grades (VAS 93.81% ± 4.99% to HDD 92.20% ± 4.53%) and higher practical examination grades (VAS 97.43% ± 2.91% to HDD 93.55% ± 4.39%) compared with those who used HDD. However, there were no significant differences between groups on written anatomy examinations (VAS 89.42% ± 7.21% to HDD 90.40% ± 4.94%), kinesiology grades (VAS 91.86% ± 4.52% to HDD 92.80% ± 4.27%), or foundational musculoskeletal grades (VAS 89.50% ± 3.89% to HDD 89.77% ± 3.83%). DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSION:

The causal-comparative study design prevents concluding that PT student grade differences were due exclusively to either anatomy laboratory method. It does provide preliminary evidence that the PT anatomy laboratory method did not practically affect anatomy performance or long-term application of anatomy knowledge in future coursework.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Disección / Anatomía Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Phys Ther Educ Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Disección / Anatomía Límite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Phys Ther Educ Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article
...