|
 |
| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2020 | Volume
: 6
| Issue : 1 | Page : 23-26 |
|
A Cross-sectional and Comparative Study of Attitude and Manner of Medical, Dental and Paramedical Students Towards Cadaveric Dissection
Lakshmi Venkata Simhacahalam Kutikuppala1, Anirban Das Gupta2, Kanna Sruthi1, MV Sathvika1
1 Konaseema Institute of Medical Sciences & Research Foundation (KIMS & RF), Amalapuram, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, AIIMS Kalyani, India
| Date of Submission | 17-Sep-2019 |
| Date of Decision | 28-Oct-2019 |
| Date of Acceptance | 02-Feb-2020 |
| Date of Web Publication | 30-Apr-2020 |
Correspondence Address:
Associate Professor Anirban Das Gupta
Department of Anatomy, AIIMS Kalyani
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/mamcjms.mamcjms_73_19
Background: Anatomy is the initial, basic and foundational subject of the medical and dental curriculum. It is thought to be the toughest subject in the initial days of the medical and dental course of study. This toughest subject is made little easier through practice of dissection. Objectives: The cardinal purpose of this study is to evaluate the attitude and manner of dissection, also to explore the views and perspectives towards cadaver and dissection among medical, dental and paramedical students. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study carried out at a reputed and well-recognised medical college. Study population is made of 546 students (medical, dental and paramedical students). They were given a well-prepared student questionnaire (made of 35 questions) and the responses were obtained and analysed. Results: Among 546 students (224 males and 322 females); 328 are MBBS, 127 are paramedical and 91 are BDS students. Four best questions were selected in the distributed questionnaire based on significance as P values, in which the question asked “Are you interested in cadaveric dissection” is extremely significant with a P value of 0.0092. Conclusions: Many of the students opted for the use of pre-dissected human specimens, instead of cadaveric dissection. They felt that dissection can help them to work as a team and improves their group discussion ability. Though most of the students are interested in cadaveric dissection, they touch the cadaver less often.
Keywords: Anatomy, attitude, cadaveric dissection, pre-dissected specimens, students
How to cite this article:
Kutikuppala LV, Gupta AD, Sruthi K, Sathvika M V. A Cross-sectional and Comparative Study of Attitude and Manner of Medical, Dental and Paramedical Students Towards Cadaveric Dissection. MAMC J Med Sci 2020;6:23-6 |
How to cite this URL:
Kutikuppala LV, Gupta AD, Sruthi K, Sathvika M V. A Cross-sectional and Comparative Study of Attitude and Manner of Medical, Dental and Paramedical Students Towards Cadaveric Dissection. MAMC J Med Sci [serial online] 2020 [cited 2023 Jun 9];6:23-6. Available from: https://www.mamcjms.in/text.asp?2020/6/1/23/283511 |
Key Messages
Though most of the students are interested in cadaveric dissection, they touch the cadaver less often. There is an improvement in the views and orientation of students on cadaveric dissection in recent years, which aids in improving their knowledge and skills in understanding anatomy.
| Introduction | |  |
Medical Anatomy is the medical science dealing with study of structures and their organization in human body.[1] Basically, cadaveric dissection (CD) forms an essential part of learning anatomy. Anatomy dissection facilitates better understanding and improved learning.[2] In the course of learning and practicing dissection, students face and experience some unfavourable situations.[3] The main objective of this study was to evaluate medical, dental paramedical students’ attitude and manner of CD
So, the cardinal purpose of this study is to explore the views and perspectives of medical, dental and paramedical students towards CD and compare their responses.
| Subjects and Methods | | |
This is a cross-sectional and comparative study carried out at a reputed and well recognised medical institution. In achieving this, 546 students (222 males and 324 females) comprising medical, dental and paramedical students were assessed and evaluated by distribution of standard and structured questionnaire (made of 35 questions) forms. The questions asked in the questionnaire were about the student’s attitude and manner towards CD. Later, the forms were evaluated and the data were obtained and assessed. Data collected were entered into MS Excel and GraphPad InStat Software was used for statistical analysis. The responses were tabulated and comparison between the stages of curricula and genders with respect to each question asked was performed by independent t-test. The P-value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.
| Results | | |
A total of 546 medical, dental, paramedical students participated in this study, out of which, 328 (60.9%) were MBBS, 91 (22.9%) were BDS and 127 (16.2 %) were paramedical students, who were about to complete their first year curriculum respectively. All the answered data from the questionnaires were evaluated, correlated and compared. The four best questions were selected based on their order of significance. The question asked “Are you interested in cadaver donation?” was not significant with a p value of 0.0961 [Figure 1]. The question asked “How often do you touch the cadaver?” was not significant with a p value of 0.0841 [Figure 2]. Most of the students answered it as they touch the cadaver less often. The question asked “What other teaching methods do you suggest instead of cadaveric dissection?” was significant with a P value of 0.0446 [Figure 3]. The question asked “Are you interested in performing cadaveric dissection?” is significant with a P value of 0.0092 [Figure 4]. | Figure 1 Showing response of students towards their interest in cadaver donation
Click here to view |
 | Figure 3 Showing suggestions of students to teaching methods other than cadaveric dissection
Click here to view |
 | Figure 4 Showing interest of students in performing cadaveric dissection
Click here to view |
| Discussion | | |
Five hundred and forty six students from MBBS, BDS, and Paramedical students were considered and given a questionnaire consisting of 35 questions related to CD. Out of these 35 questions, four best questions are analysed with Chi-square test. The statistical results are depicted in [Table 1]. The responses for the questions included in the table were explained and mentioned in the [Figure 1],[Figure 2],[Figure 3],[Figure 4]. The responses of the students collected and assessed by the questionnaires denote their attitude and manner towards CD. | Table 1 Significance of the four best questions asked in the questionnaire
Click here to view |
Most of the students had symptoms such as on their first entry into dissecting room only that is on the first day of their visit.[4] Smell and Infection were most common causes of fear towards dissection among most of the students.[5] Many of them follow strict hand wash techniques after their dissection hours with antiseptic sanitizers. All of them think personal protective equipment is necessary for dissection. All the students respect the cadaver and have a sense of gratitude to people who have donated their bodies. All the participants have accepted that CD was useful tool in learning Medical Anatomy.[6]
In summary, although most of the students were interested in CD, they less often touch the cadaver. Many of the students opted for pre-dissected human specimens, instead of CD.[7] They felt that, dissection can help them to work as a team and improve their group discussion abilities. After comparison with the respective courses (MBBS, Dental and Paramedical), it was found that there were not much variations and differences in attitude and manner towards CD among Medical, Dental, and Paramedical students. All of them have similar views and responses towards CD. There was not much gender difference among the students regarding their views on dissection.[8] The senior students felt the importance of dissection more than the junior students of the respective courses. This could be due to the clinical application and integration of the subject in upcoming higher classes of the medical curriculum. There was a lot of improvement in the views and orientation of student on CD in the recent years, which is a great sign to improve their knowledge and skills in understanding anatomy in detail.
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank the Management, Dean, Head of Department (HOD) of Anatomy of our institution for all the support and help rendered. We are very much grateful to all the students of the respective courses for participating in this study.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References | | |
| 1. | Patricia A Wisenden, Katherine J. Budke, Chelsea J. Klemetson et al. Emotional response of undergraduates to cadaver dissection. Clin Anat 2017;31:224-30.  |
| 2. | Emeka G. Anyanwu. Background music in the dissection laboratory: impact on stress associated with the dissection experience. Adv Physiol Educ 2015;39:96-101. |
| 3. | Shugaba AI, Usman YM, Shimwen FJ et al. Attitude of Jos University medical students to their initial encounter with cadavers in the dissecting room. J Exp Clin Anat 2015;14:101-4 |
| 4. | Plaisant O, Stephens S, Apaydin N et al. Medical students’ attitudes towards science and gross anatomy, and the relationship to personality. J Anat 2013;224:261-9. |
| 5. | Lamdin R, Weller J, Kerse N. Orientation to dissection: Assisting students through the transition. Clin Anat 2011;25:235-40. |
| 6. | Boeckers A, Brinkmann A, Jerg-Bretzke L et al. How can we deal with mental distress in the dissection room?—An evaluation of the need for psychological support. Ann Anat 2010; 192:366-72. |
| 7. | Cahill KC, Ettarh RR. Attitudes to anatomy dissection in an Irish medical school. Clin Anat 2009;22:386-91. |
| 8. | Arráez‐Aybar LA, Casado‐Morales MI, Castaño‐Collado G. Anxiety and dissection of the human cadaver: An unsolvable relationship? Anat Rec B New Anat 2004;279:16-23. |
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4]
[Table 1]
|
Related articles