Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching Anatomy: Prosections and Dissections

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Teaching Anatomy

Abstract

Anatomy provides a rich environment to learn from cadaveric resources. Cadaveric resources are a rich environment for learning anatomy. Anatomy laboratory sessions can use cadaveric resources in either dissection- or prosection-based modes of teaching. Each mode presents advantages in how it allows students to examine and explore the three-dimensional structural organization of the human body. When designing anatomy laboratory sessions, the advantages of each of these modes need to be considered. Once a mode of teaching has been determined, learning activities should be designed that are engaging, contextual and clinically relevant. Anatomy laboratory activities can creatively embed graduate attributes like teamwork, critical thinking, and communication skills. Multidimensional learning activities that relate cadaveric anatomy to living anatomy will ensure student engagement and enthusiasm. Designing and implementing anatomy laboratory activities should be based on a model of continuous improvement that involves review and refinement based on student feedback and evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Yeager VL. Learning gross anatomy: dissection and prosection. Clin Anat. 1996;9:57–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Patel KM, Moxham BJ. Attitudes of professional anatomists to curricular change. Clin Anat. 2006;19(2):132–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rizzolo LJ, Stewart WB, O’Brien M, Halms A, Rando W, Abrahams J, Dunne S, Wang S, Aden M. Design principles for developing an efficient clinical anatomy course. Med Teach. 2006;28(2):142–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berube D, Murray C, Schultze K. Cadaver and computer use in the teaching of gross anatomy in physical therapy education. J Phys Therapy Educ. 1999;13(2):41–6.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Nnodim JO. Learning human anatomy: by dissection or from prosections? Med Educ. 1990;24(4):389–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nnodim JO, Ohanaka EC, Osuji CU. A follow-up comparative study of two modes of learning human anatomy: by dissection and from prosections. Clin Anat. 1996;9(4):258–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Drake RL, McBride JM, Lachman N, Pawlina W. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: the winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(6):253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Turney BW. Anatomy in the modern curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007;89(2):104–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Johnson J. Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: personal dissection versus peer teaching. Clin Anat. 2002;15:38–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gogalniceanu P, Hardi M, Paraskevas AP, Darzi A. Anatomy teaching in the 21st century—dead cool or cold dead? Anat Sci Educ. 2008;1(3):136–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Granger NA. Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. Anat Record 2004;281B:6–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McLachlan JC, Bligh J, Bradley P, Searle J. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med Educ. 2004;38(4):418–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Parker LM. Anatomical dissection: Why are we cutting it out? Dissection in undergraduate teaching. Aust NZ J Surg. 2002;72(12):910–2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pabst R, Rothkotter HJ. Retrospective evaluation of undergraduate medical education by doctors at the end of their residency time in hospitals: consequences for anatomical curriculum. Anat Rec. 1997;249:431–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lempp HK. Perceptions of dissection by students in one medical school: beyond learning about anatomy. A qualitative study. Med Educ. 2005; 39(3):318–25

    Google Scholar 

  16. McLachlan JC. New path for teaching anatomy: living anatomy and medical imaging vs dissection. Anat Record 2004;281B:2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Carroll RE, Whiten S, Jakson D, Sinclair DW. Assessing the emotional impact of cadaver dissection on medical students. Med Educ. 2002;36:550–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cahill KC, Ettarh RR. Attitudes to anatomy dissection in an Irish medical school. Clin Anat. 2009;22(3):386–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dinsmore CE, Daugherty S, Zeitz HJ. Teaching and learning gross anatomy: dissection, prosection, or both of the above? Clin Anat. 1999;12:111–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Michaelsen LK, Watson WE, Cragin JP, Fink LD. Team-based learning: A potential solution to the problems of large classes. Exchange Org Behav Teach J. 1982;7(4):18–33.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Michaelsen LK, Knight AB, Fink LD. Team-based learning: a transformative use of small groups. New York: Praeger; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Skidmore JR. The case for prosection: comment on R.L.M. Newell’s paper. Clin Anat. 1995;8:128–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lattore RM, García-Sanz MP, Moreno M, Hernández F, Gil F, López O, Ayala MD, Ramírez G, Vázquez JM, Arencibia A, Henry RW. How useful is plastination in learning anatomy? Vet Med Educ. 2007;34(2):172–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fruhstorfer BH, Palmer J, Brydges S, Abrahams PH. The use of plastinated prosections for teaching anatomy-the view of medical students on the value of this learning resource. Clin Anat. 2011;24(2):246–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McKeown PP, Heylings DJA, Stevenson M, McKelvey KJ, Nixon JR, McCluskey DR. The impact of curricular change on medical students’ knowledge of anatomy. Med Educ. 2003;37(11):954–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Camp CL, Gregory JK, Lachman N, Chen LP, Juskewitch JE, Pawlina W. Comparative efficacy of group and individual feedback in gross anatomy for promoting medical student professionalism. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3(2):64–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learn Instr. 1994;4:295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Khalil MK, Paas F, Johnson TE, Payer AF. Interactive and dynamic visualizations in teaching and learning anatomy: a cognitive load perspective. Anat Rec. 2005;386B:8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Granger NA, Calleson D. The impact of alternating dissection on student performance in a medical anatomy course: are dissection videos an effective substitute for actual dissection? Clin Anat. 2007;20(3):315–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ganguly PK, Chan LK. Living anatomy in the 21st century: how far can we go? South East Asian J Med Educ. 2008;2(2):52–7.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Fakoya FA. Integrating ultrasound technology into teaching gross anatomy: point of order! Med Educ Online. 2013;18:20888.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Swamy M, Searle RF. Anatomy teaching with portable ultrasound to medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12:99.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Böckers A, Mayer C, Böckers TM. Does learning in clinical context in anatomical sciences improve examination results, learning motivation, or learning orientation? Anat Sci Educ. 2014; 7(1):3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Holland BK. Modified use of team-based learning for effective delivery of medical gross anatomy and embryology. Anat Sci Educ. 2008;1:3–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Medical Sciences, Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

    Nalini Pather PhD

Authors
  1. Nalini Pather PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nalini Pather PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anatomy, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Medical and Health Sciences Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Lap Ki Chan

  2. Department of Anatomy, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

    Wojciech Pawlina

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pather, N. (2015). Teaching Anatomy: Prosections and Dissections. In: Chan, L., Pawlina, W. (eds) Teaching Anatomy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08930-0_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08930-0_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08929-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08930-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation