Exploring effectiveness in brain removal techniques: A comparison of approaches.

Brain dissection is typically an important part of teaching neuroscience in health professional programs. This results in the need to effectively remove brains, which is often performed in a gross anatomy laboratory in the same curriculum. The aim of this study was to determine the most effective method of brain removal based on the time required for removal, difficulty of removal, and preservation of key brain structures for educational purposes. Six different dissectors performed each of the three calvaria removal approaches and three different spinal cord transection methods rating them for difficulty and tracking the time required. The combination of calvaria and brainstem approaches and the order of completion was randomized to control for fatigue and previous individual experience. After all brains were removed, each was evaluated by neuroscience faculty for utility in education contexts. The study found little difference between the individual approaches for both calvaria removal and spinal cord transection in regards to quality of outcome. The use of a circumferential cut only proved to be the most time-effective method for calvaria removal while a posterior cut between C1 and C2 was the most time-effective and least difficult method for brainstem release. There was no one technique that proved to be most beneficial across all three measures. However, different approaches resulted in a different combination of benefits across the time, difficulty, and outcome ratings that should be considered in light of the individual needs of any program or researcher.

In their own words: impact of donor information and personal statements on humanization of donors in a gross anatomy course.

Humanization of donors in gross anatomy courses has been reported to facilitate professional behavior in healthcare students. However, there is a lack of research investigating whether students' knowledge of donor information is associated with humanization of whole body donors. To address this gap, the present study aimed to 1) determine whether knowledge of donor information is associated with greater humanization of donors and 2) investigate student perceptions of receiving donor information. Donor information was provided to students at the beginning of the course (cohort A) or at midsemester (cohort B). Questionnaires utilized quantitative and qualitative methods to assess humanization and student perceptions at the beginning, middle, and end of the semester. Independent t tests demonstrated that there was no statistically significant difference in mean humanization scores between cohorts A and B before the first dissection [t(37) = 0.449, P = 0.656], at midsemester [t(35) = -1.546, P = 0.131], or at the end of the semester [t(28) = 0.004, P = 0.997]. Thematic analysis demonstrated that as the semester progressed students' view of dissection as an invasion of privacy and the donor as a patient decreased. Themes delineated from students' open-ended responses revealed that students felt a connection with their donors; that the donors' consenting information gave permission to dissect; and that the information gave students an invaluable learning experience. Students demonstrated detached concern toward their donor, viewing the donor as a learning tool or educator rather than a patient. However, their responses also indicated the development of a deeper, personal connection to donors.NEW & NOTEWORTHY A look at the use of donor personal statements and information to humanize donors and how it influenced students' experiences in a gross anatomy laboratory.

Mississippi's whole body donors: Analysis of donor pool demographics and their rationale for donation.

BACKGROUND: Whole body donation (WBD) is fundamental to anatomical education and research because human dissection provides an educational tool for training healthcare professionals. Investigation into the demographics and rationale of whole body donors can provide insight on who donates their bodies to science. Literature reports a typical donor who is a 60 to 70-year-old, white, married, educated man with the reason for donating to be altruism. Because there are no studies in the United States (US) about the rationale of WBD in correlation with the donor characteristics, this study seeks to accomplish two aims: (1) analyze the demographics of the University of Mississippi Medical Center's (UMMC) current donor registrants and (2) analyze their reasons for donation. METHODS: Data from authorization forms from living preregistered donors were analyzed. A survey was sent to registrants who filled out these forms between 2017 and 2019 about their reasons for body donation. RESULTS: UMMC has an average donor registrant population consisting of 69-year-old white (95.2%), females (56.5%) who acquired a college degree (24.9%) and are in good health at the time of donation (50.8%). Males and females differed in their marital status (p = 0.001), with more married males (67.2%) than females (46.2%) donating their bodies to science. Seven hundred eighty-one registrants completed the survey (56.3% response rate, n = 1,387). Their primary and secondary reasons for donation were furthering medical education/research (57.4%) and giving their body purpose after life (49.2%), respectively. In addition, thematic analysis of 62 donor rationale statements revealed that the majority of registrants wanted to donate their bodies for the purpose of being useful. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that UMMC's current registrant demographic data deviates from what is presented in the literature. The study also found that the main reason for donation for this registrant population was altruism with the purpose of being useful. Information from this study adds current US data to the published literature on WBD.