Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Efficacy of Video-Based Forearm Anatomy Model Instruction for a Virtual Education Environment.
Dharamsi, Miraal S; Bastian, D Anthony; Balsiger, Heather A; Cramer, Joel T; Belmares, Ricardo.
Afiliação
  • Dharamsi MS; Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA.
  • Bastian DA; HCA Las Palmas Del Sol Healthcare Center, El Paso, TX, USA.
  • Balsiger HA; Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA.
  • Cramer JT; University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA.
  • Belmares R; Paul L. Foster School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Science Center El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA.
J Med Educ Curric Dev ; 9: 23821205211063287, 2022.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35024450
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

As virtual education becomes more widespread, particularly considering the recent COVID-19 pandemic, studies that assess the impact of online teaching strategies are vital. Current anatomy curriculum at Paul L. Foster School of Medicine consists of self-taught PowerPoint material, clinical vignette-centered team-based learning (dry lab), and prosection-based instruction (wet lab). This study examined the impact of video-based muscle model (VBMM) instruction using a student-designed forearm muscle model on anatomy quiz scores and student perceptions of its effectiveness with regards to learning outcomes.

METHODS:

Students divided into Group 1 (54 students) and Group 2 (53 students) were assessed prior to and following a 3.5-minute video on anterior forearm compartment musculature using the muscle model. Group 1 began by completing a pretest, then received VBMM instruction, and then completed a posttest prior to participating in the standard dry lab and 1 hour wet lab. Group 2 completed the wet lab, then received the pretest, VBMM instruction, and posttest prior to participating in the dry lab. Both groups took an identical five-question quiz covering locations and functions of various anterior forearm muscles each time.

RESULTS:

Mean scores were higher than no formal intervention with exposure to VBMM instruction alone (0.73 points, P = .01), wet lab alone (0.88 points, P = .002), and wet lab plus VBMM instruction (1.35 points, P= <.001). No significant difference in scores was found between instruction with VBMM versus wet lab alone (P = 1.00), or between either instruction method alone compared to a combination of the two methods (P = .34, .09). Student survey opinions on the VBMM instruction method were positive.

CONCLUSION:

VBMM instruction is comparable to prosection-based lab with regards to score outcomes and was well received by students as both an independent learning tool and as a supplement to cadaveric lab. When compared to either instruction method alone, the supplementation of VBMM with cadaveric prosection instruction was best. VBMM instruction may be valuable for institutions without access to cadaveric specimens, or those looking to supplement their current anatomy curriculum.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Med Educ Curric Dev Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: J Med Educ Curric Dev Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos