Radiological Anatomy – Evaluation of Integrative Education in Radiology

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Acknowledgement

This manuscript is dedicated to Professor Bernd Hamm for his 60th birthday.

Abstract

Purpose: Evaluation and analysis of the integrative course “Radiological Anatomy” established since 2007 at the Medical School Hannover (MHH) in comparison with conventional education.

Materials and Methods: Anatomy and radiology are usually taught separately with a considerable time lag. Interdisciplinary teaching of these associated subjects seems logical for several reasons. Therefore, the integrative course “Radiological Anatomy” was established in the second year of medical education, combining these two closely related subjects. This interdisciplinary course was retrospectively evaluated by consideration of a student questionnaire and staff observations. The advantages and disadvantages of integrative teaching in medical education are discussed.

Results: The course ratings were excellent (median 1; mean 1.3 on a scale of 1 to 6). This is significantly (p < 0.001) better than the average of all evaluated courses in the respective term (grade 2.8). The course improved the anatomical comprehension (90 %) and the students stated that the topics were relevant for their future medical education (90 %). Furthermore, interest in the subject’s anatomy and radiology increased during the course (88 %). According to the students’ suggestions the course was enhanced by a visitation in the Department of Radiology and the additional topic central nervous system.

Conclusion: Integrative teaching of anatomy and radiology was well received by the students. Both, anatomical and radiological comprehension and the motivation to learn were improved. However, it should be considered, that the amount of work and time required by the teaching staff is considerably increased compared to traditional teaching.

Key Points:

• Combined teaching of anatomy and radiology may improve anatomical and radiological comprehension.

• Integrative teaching enhances the students’ motivation to learn and their interest in the subjects.

• The students’ ratings of our integrative course was better than those of conventional courses.

Citation Format:

• Dettmer S, Schmiedl A, Meyer S et al. Radiological Anatomy – Evaluation of Integrative Education in Radiology. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2013; 185: 838 – 843

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Die Evaluation und Analyse des integrativen Faches „Anatomie im Röntgenbild“, das seit 2007 an der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover (MHH) etabliert ist, im Vergleich zu herkömmlichen Kursen.

Material und Methoden: Anatomie und Radiologie werden meist unabhängig voneinander und mit zeitlicher Trennung unterrichtet, obwohl ein gemeinsamer Unterricht sinnvoll erscheint. Deshalb wurde das vorklinische integrative Wahlpflichtfach „Anatomie im Röntgenbild“ etabliert. Es werden die studentische Evaluationen sowie die Beobachtungen der Dozenten bezüglich des Lernverhaltens der Studierenden retrospektiv analysiert und basierend darauf die Vor- und Nachteile der integrativen Lehre in der medizinischen Ausbildung diskutiert.

Ergebnisse: Die Studierenden bewerteten den Kurs mit „sehr gut“ (Median: 1; Mittelwert 1,3; auf einer Skala von 1 – 6). Diese Bewertung war somit signifikant (p < 0,001) besser als die durchschnittliche Bewertung aller evaluierten Kurse im 2. Studienjahr (Note 2,8). Die Studierenden gaben an, dass der gemeinsame Unterricht das anatomische Verständnis erleichtert (90 %) und dass das Gelernte Relevanz für ihre zukünftige Tätigkeit hat (93 %). Der Kurs hat das Interesse der Studierenden an den beiden Fächern verstärkt (88 %). Dem Wunsch nach einer Ausweitung des Kurses wurde durch das Angebot einer Besichtigung der Radiologie und der Einführung des zusätzlichen Kurstags „Zentrales Nervensystem“ Rechnung getragen, was von den Studierenden positiv bewertet wurde.

Schlussfolgerung: Die integrative Lehre von Anatomie und Radiologie erwies sich als ein Lehrkonzept mit großer Akzeptanz bei den Studierenden. Sie verbesserte das anatomische und auch das radiologische Verständnis und erhöhte die Lernmotivation. Es sollte allerdings beachtet werden, dass sich der Zeitaufwand für die Dozenten im Vergleich zum herkömmlichen Unterricht erheblich erhöht.

• References

• 1 Turney BW. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2007; 89: 104-107
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Azer SA, Eizenberg N. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first- and second-year students. Surg Radiol Anat 2007; 29: 173-180
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Pabst R, Westermann J, Lippert H. Integration of clinical problems in teaching gross anatomy: living anatomy, X-ray anatomy, patient presentations, and films depicting clinical problems. Anat Rec 1986; 215: 92-94
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Pabst R. Anatomy curriculum for medical students. What can be learned for future curricula from evaluations and questionnaires completed by students, anatomists and clinicians in different countries?. Ann Anat 2009; 191: 541-546
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Zumwalt AC, Lufler RS, Monteiro J et al. Building the body: active learning laboratories that emphasize practical aspects of anatomy and integration with radiology. Anat Sci Educ 2010; 3: 134-140
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Miles KA. Diagnostic imaging in undergraduate medical education: an expanding role. Clin Radiol 2005; 60: 742-745
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Peuker ET, Filler TJ, Berns T et al. Klinische Anatomie als integrierendes Element in der Lehre der operativen Fächer. Chirurg 1998; 69: 1324-1328
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Older J. Anatomy: a must for teaching the next generation. Surgeon 2004; 2: 79-90
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Chowdhury R, Wilson ID, Oeppen RS. The departments of radiology and anatomy: new symbiotic relations?. Clin Radiol 2008; 63: 918-920
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Bundesrat. Approbationsordnung für Ärzte (ÄAppO). Bundesanzeiger; 2002
  Google Scholar
• 11 Boon JM, Meiring JH, Richards PA et al. Evaluation of clinical relevance of problem-oriented teaching in undergraduate anatomy at the University of Pretoria. Surg Radiol Anat 2001; 23: 57-60
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Dettmer S, Tschernig T, Galanski M et al. Teaching surgery, radiology and anatomy together: the mix enhances motivation and comprehension. Surg Radiol Anat 2010; 32: 791-795
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Lippert H, Herbold D, Lippert-Burmester W. Anatomie am Krankenbett: Körperliche Untersuchung und kleine Eingriffe. Berlin, Heildelberg: Springer; 1997
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 14 Lippert H. Lehrbuch Anatomie. München: Urban & Fischer; 2011
  Google Scholar
• 15 Insull PJ, Kejriwal R, Blyth P. Surgical inclination and anatomy teaching at the University of Auckland. ANZ J Surg 2006; 76: 1056-1059
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Gunderman RB, Wilson PK. Viewpoint: exploring the human interior: the roles of cadaver dissection and radiologic imaging in teaching anatomy. Acad Med 2005; 80: 745-749
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Hinduja K, Samuel R, Mitchell S. Problem-based learning: is anatomy a casualty?. Surgeon 2005; 3: 84-87
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ 2007; 41: 15-22
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Evans DJ, Watt DJ. Provision of anatomical teaching in a new British medical school: getting the right mix. Anat Rec B New Anat 2005; 284: 22-27
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Marker DR, Bansal AK, Juluru K et al. Developing a radiology-based teaching approach for gross anatomy in the digital era. Acad Radiol 2010; 17: 1057-1065
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Grunewald M, Heckemann RA, Gebhard H et al. COMPARE radiology: creating an interactive Web-based training program for radiology with multimedia authoring software. Acad Radiol 2003; 10: 543-553
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Schütze B, Mildenberger P, Kämmerer M. E-learning in der Radiologie – praktischer Einsatz des Content-Management-Systems Ilias. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2006; 178: 525-530
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Liebermann G, Abramson R, Volkan K et al. Tutor versus computer: a prospective comparison of interactive tutorial and computer-assisted instruction in radiology education. Acad Radiol 2002; 9: 40-49
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Lanier L, Kaude JV. Radiologic anatomy – a credit course for first-year medical students. Acta Radiol 1993; 34: 414-416
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

• Supplementary Material