Dissecting through the decade: a 10-year cross-sectional analysis of interprofessional experiences in the anatomy lab.

Interprofessional education (IPE) is prioritized as a critical component in preparing pre-licensure health professional students for effective teamwork and collaboration in the workplace to facilitate patient-centered care. Knowledge in anatomy is fundamental for healthcare professionals, making interprofessional anatomy education an attractive intervention for IPE and anatomy learning. Since 2009, the Education Program in Anatomy at McMaster University has offered an intensive 10-week IPE Anatomy Dissection elective to seven health professional programs annually. From 2011, students were invited to complete the Readiness for Interprofessional Scale (RIPLS) and Interprofessional Education Perception Scale (IEPS) before and after the elective. A total of 264 students from 2011 to 2020 completed RIPLS and IEPS. There were significant differences before and after the elective in students' total RIPLS scores and three of the four subscales: teamwork and collaboration, positive professional identity, and roles and responsibilities. Similarly, there were statistical differences in the total IEPS scores and two of three subscales: competency and autonomy and perceived actual cooperation. Statistically significant differences in RIPLS and IEPS total scores across several disciplines were also observed. This study demonstrates the elective's impact in improving students' IPE perceptions and attitudes, likely from the extended learning and exposure opportunity with other disciplines.

Student perceptions of hybrid delivery of interprofessional anatomy-The best of both worlds?

Interprofessional anatomy dissection (IAD) courses increase students' readiness for interprofessional education (IPE) both in-person and online. During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtual environments for anatomy learning were perceived as less effective. Hybrid instruction approaches emerged but have been scarcely evaluated. This study assessed students' experiences with a hybrid IAD course's virtual and in-person components. A hybrid IAD course consisting of virtual and in-person anatomy laboratory-based instruction was offered to 32 students from different health sciences programs. Before and after the full course, students completed the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). After the virtual and the in-person course components, students completed a Q-methodology survey to assess their perceptions of the course. Twenty-eight students (20 females; 24.8 ± 6.3 years old) from different programs (4 Physician Assistant; 2 Midwifery; 3 Speech-Language Pathology; 4 Physiotherapy; 3 Occupational therapy; 4 Nursing; 8 Medicine) participated. The total RIPLS score improved after the 8-week course (Median 84 interquartile range [78-87] vs. 87 [85-90]; p = 0.0145). The Q-methodology identified three factors: IPE & Virtual Enthusiasts, Introspective Learners, and IPE & Virtual Skeptics. Factors represented different levels of students' engagement with the IPE and virtual environment. The transition to in-person resulted in all factors praising the experience. Health science students showed improvements in their readiness for IPE after an 8-week hybrid IAD course. The main differences in the evaluations of the virtual and in-person components were related to engagement and the ability to learn anatomy; no differences were noted between settings regarding engagement in IPE.

Development of the McMaster Embalming Scale (MES) to assess embalming solutions for surgical skills training.

Human cadavers used for surgical training are embalmed using various methods to facilitate tissue storage and longevity while preserving the natural characteristics required to achieve high fidelity functional task alignment. However, there are no standardized means to evaluate the suitability of embalming solutions for this purpose. The McMaster Embalming Scale (MES) was developed to assess the extent to which embalming solutions allow tissues to achieve physical and functional correspondence to clinical contexts. The MES follows a five-point Likert scale format and evaluates the effect of embalming solutions on tissue utility in seven domains. This study aims to determine the reliability and validity of the MES by presenting it to users after performing surgical skills on tissues embalmed using various solutions. A pilot study of the MES was conducted using porcine material. Surgical residents of all levels and faculty were recruited via the Surgical Foundations program at McMaster University. Porcine tissue was unembalmed (fresh- frozen) or embalmed using one of seven solutions identified in the literature. Participants were blinded to the embalming method as they completed four surgical skills on the tissue. After each performance, participants evaluated their experience using the MES. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. Domain to total correlations and a g-study were also conducted. Formalin-fixed tissue achieved the lowest average scores, while fresh frozen tissue achieved the highest. Tissues preserved using Surgical Reality Fluid (Trinity Fluids, LLC, Harsens Island, MI) achieved the highest scores among embalmed tissues. The Cronbach's alpha scores varied between 0.85 and 0.92, indicating a random sample of new raters would offer similar ratings using the MES. All domains except odor were positively correlated. The g-study indicated that the MES is able to differentiate between embalming solutions, but an individual rater's preference for certain tissue qualities also contributes to the variance in scores captured. This study evaluated the psychometric characteristics of the MES. Future steps to this investigation include validating the MES on human cadavers.

Piloting an interprofessional virtual cadaveric dissection course: Responding to COVID-19.

Interprofessional learning improves students' clinical and interprofessional competencies. COVID-19 prevented delivering in-person education and motivated the development of a virtual interprofessional cadaveric dissection (ICD) course. This study reports on the effects of a virtual ICD course compared to a previously delivered in-person course, on students' readiness for, and perceptions about, interprofessional learning. Students attending the ICD course in-person (2019-2020) or virtually (2020-2021) completed the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). Students in the virtual course also provided written feedback. Thirty-two (24 women; Median: 24 [Q1-Q3: 22-25] years) and 23 students (18 women; 22 [21-23] years) attended the in-person and virtual courses, respectively. In the virtual cohort, the RIPLS total score (82 [76-87] vs. 85 [78-90]; p = 0.034) and the roles and responsibilities sub-score (11 [9-12] vs. 12 [11-13]; p = 0.001) improved significantly. In the in-person cohort, the roles and responsibilities sub-score improved significantly (12 [10-14] vs. 13 [11-14]; p = 0.017). No significant differences were observed between cohorts (p < 0.05). Themes identified in the qualitative analysis were advantages and positive experiences, competencies acquired, disadvantages and challenges, and preferences and suggestions. In-person and virtual ICD courses seem to have similar effects on students' interprofessional learning. However, students reported preferring the in-person setting for learning anatomy-dissection skills.

National Survey on Canadian Undergraduate Medical Programs: The Decline of the Anatomical Sciences in Canadian Medical Education.

The anatomical sciences have always been regarded as an essential component of medical education. In Canada, the methodology and time dedicated to anatomy teaching are currently unknown. Two surveys were administered to course directors and discipline leaders to gain a comprehensive view of anatomical education in Canadian medical schools. Participants were queried about contact hours (classroom and laboratory), content delivery and assessment methods for gross anatomy, histology, and embryology. Twelve schools responded to both surveys, for an overall response rate of 64%. Overall, Canadian medical students spend 92.8 (± 45.4) hours (mean ± SD) studying gross anatomy, 25.2 (± 21.0) hours for histology, and 7.4 (± 4.3) hours for embryology. Gross anatomy contact hours statistically significantly exceeded those for histology and embryology. Results show that most content is delivered in the first year of medical school, as anatomy is a foundational building block for upper-year courses. Laboratory contact time for gross anatomy was 56.8 (± 30.7) hours, histology was 11.4 (± 16.2) hours, and embryology was 0.25 (± 0.6) hours. Additionally, 42% of programs predominantly used instructor/technician-made prosections, another 33% used a mix of dissection and prosections and 25% have their students complete cadaveric dissections. Teaching is either completely or partially integrated into all Canadian medical curricula. This integration trend in Canada parallels those of other medical schools around the world where programs have begun to decrease contact time in anatomy and increase integration of the anatomical sciences into other courses. Compared to published American data, Canadian schools offer less contact time. The reason for this gap is unknown. Further investigation is required to determine if the amount of anatomical science education within medical school affects students' performance in clerkship, residency and beyond.