Presentation of preclinical gastrointestinal anatomy via laparoscopic simulation.

In this report, the authors examine the integration of teaching anatomical science with clinical implications in minimally invasive surgery. The authors hypothesized that implementation of integrated laparoscopic simulation during undergraduate medical education would improve student learning of anatomical structures from in situ, laparoscopic orientations; and subsequently improve student preparation for clinical rotations and clerkships. During the fall of 2020 and 2021, 260 (130 students/year) second year medical students at the University of Nebraska Medical Center participated in a six-week gastrointestinal curriculum. Following a traditional anatomy dissection experience, students completed a laparoscopic event consisting of narrated laparoscopic videos and hands-on laparoscopic simulation. To examine the integrated curricular event, outcome measures focused on technical performance using grasping forceps, anatomical knowledge, and perception of the educational innovation. Outcomes were analyzed via timed performance and a pre and post assessment that was designed to assess student anatomical knowledge and perception. Completion of the technical performance assessment ranged from 1 min, 17 s to 6 min. Student knowledge of anatomical structures from in situ, laparoscopic orientations following the laparoscopic simulation sessions was significantly improved (53.3% pre vs 81.0% post), and almost all students (98.9%) agreed that the simulation sessions improved their understanding of laparoscopic anatomy and procedures. This report demonstrates the implementation of a multidisciplinary, integrated simulation that satisfied basic science anatomy teaching objectives, while enhancing student enthusiasm for the content. Future studies will examine the subsequent impact of the innovation on student preparedness for clinical rotations and clerkships.

The state of anatomical donation programs amidst the SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) pandemic.

The inclusion of human body dissection in anatomical science curricula has been described as a critical educational experience for the mastery of anatomical structures and concepts. To ensure that body donors are ethically acquired and suitable for anatomy education, Anatomical Donation Programs (ADPs) are tasked with the responsibility of acquiring body donors for basic and clinical science curricula. Considering the personal and institutional impact of SARS-CoV-2, a national survey was conducted to examine the current effect of the pandemic on ADP protocols, body donation, and the sustainability of ADPs in the United States (U.S.). Eighty-nine U.S. ADPs were identified and contacted for optional participation in a survey to assess the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on their programs. Survey data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools. Thirty-six ADPs (40.5% response rate) from the nine U.S. Divisions are represented in the survey results. Data were collected on ADP descriptions and demographics, SARS-CoV-2 impact on ADPs and protocols, and body donation and ADP sustainability. Almost all ADPs reported that the pandemic has affected their ADP operations in some way; however, the sustainability for the majority of ADPs appears likely and donor availability remains stable due to a proportional decrease in body donations and body donor requests. As the long-term impact on ADPs has yet to be determined, the authors plan to reevaluate the lasting impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on body donation, ADP sustainability, and anatomical science education throughout the year 2021.

Validity of the Rule of Threes and Anatomical Relationships in the Thoracic Spine.

CONTEXT: The location of the more superficial thoracic spinous processes is used to help osteopathic physicians locate the deeper and more difficult-to-palpate thoracic transverse processes. In 1979, Mitchell et al proposed the thoracic rule of threes to describe the relationship of the spinous processes to the transverse processes in the thoracic spine. This rule is currently taught at osteopathic medical schools. The rule of threes separates the thoracic vertebrae into 3 distinct groups, each with a different relationship between transverse processes and spinous processes. In 2006, Geelhoed et al proposed a new relationship between the spinous processes and transverse processes for all thoracic vertebrae (ie, Geelhoed's rule). OBJECTIVE: To determine which anatomical relationship-the rule of threes or Geelhoed's rule-is most accurate in locating the transverse processes and to define anatomical relationships between thoracic spinous and transverse processes. METHODS: The thoracic spinous and transverse processes of 44 formalin-embalmed human cadavers were dissected, marked, and photographed. Six different measurements per vertebra were made between spinous processes and transverse processes in the thoracic spine. Geelhoed's protocol was used to determine the validity of each rule. The measurements were analyzed for additional relationships between thoracic spinous processes and transverse processes. Group 1 consisted of vertebrae T1 to T3 and T12; group 2 consisted of T4 to T6 and T11; and group 3 consisted of T7 to T10. RESULTS: Of the 528 vertebrae measured, 0% of the first group vertebrae, 10.8% of the second group vertebrae, and 69.3% of the third group vertebrae followed the rule of threes. In total, 26.7% of vertebrae followed the rule of threes, whereas 62.3% of vertebrae followed Geelhoed's rule. Additional relationships worth noting include the distance between the transverse process and the adjacent caudal transverse process on the same side is approximately 25.4 mm (1 inch), and the distance between the transverse processes of the same vertebra is approximately 50.8 mm (2 inches) for male T3-T10 vertebrae and female T1-T12 vertebrae. CONCLUSION: According to our findings, the rule of threes is not as accurate anatomically as Geelhoed's rule in locating the transverse processes of the thoracic spine. This study suggests osteopathic medical schools should teach Geelhoed's rule rather than the rule of threes.