Search

At Kansas City University, anatomy laboratories were delivered via remote (REM) or on-campus (OC) formats due to COVID-19, creating an opportunity to evaluate student perceptions of differences in laboratory delivery format. A six-item survey of Likert scale and open-ended questions explored the utility of anatomy software, prelab instruction handouts, and prosection reviews. Likert scale validity was analyzed using Cronbach's a; responses were compared among REM and OC formats using Chi-square. Descriptive codes were applied to summarize responses, which were grouped and converted into percentages. Statistically significant differences in REM versus OC formats were determined for the helpfulness of the prelab handouts ([chi-squared], 28.00; df, 4; p < 0.001) and effectiveness of cadavers in learning anatomy ([chi-squared], 20.58; df, 4; p < 0.0004). Trends in responses noted disagreement in the effectiveness of anatomy software (REM, 69.8%; OC, 51.08%), but agreement with the helpfulness of prosection reviews (REM, 85.9%; OC, 61.6%) (Cronbach a: REM, 0.648; OC, 0.646). Themes from narrative REM comments (n = 496) noted anatomy software was difficult to use (33.1%) and had issues with orientation (15.5%), as well as a student preference for OC laboratories (12.5%). The OC format responses (n = 456) noted poor software design (47.9%), unnecessary for studying (35.4%), and preference for in-person laboratories (7.4%). Qualitative analysis of narrative comments detailed other resources used, including Complete Anatomy™ and YouTube™. Trends highlighted the prelab handouts and prosection reviews for learning, the ineffectiveness of anatomy software, and a preference for OC laboratories. We highlight student perspectives of REM versus OC laboratory formats in response to COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) disrupted the in-person teaching format of anatomy. To study changes in gross anatomy education that occurred during August--December, 2020 compared to before the pandemic, an online survey was distributed to anatomy educators. The 191 responses received were analyzed in total and by academic program, geographic region, and institution type. Cadaver use decreased overall (before: 74.1 ± 34.1%, during: 50.3 ± 43.0%, P < 0.0001), as well as across allopathic and osteopathic medicine, therapy, undergraduate, and veterinary programs (P < 0.05), but remained unchanged for other programs (P > 0.05). Cadaver use decreased internationally and in the US (P < 0.0001), at public and private (P < 0.0001) institutions, and among allopathic medical programs in Northeastern, Central, and Southern (P < 0.05), but not Western, US geographical regions. Laboratories during Covid-19 were delivered through synchronous (59%), asynchronous (4%), or mixed (37%) formats (P < 0.0001) and utilized digital resources (47%), dissection (32%), and/or prosection (21%) (P < 0.0001). The practical laboratory examination persisted during COVID-19 (P = 0.419); however, the setting and materials shifted to computer-based (P < 0.0001) and image-based (P < 0.0001), respectively. In-person lecture decreased during COVID-19 (before: 88%, during: 24%, P = 0.003). When anatomy digital resources were categorized, dissection media, interactive software, and open-access content increased (P [less than or equal to] 0.008), with specific increases in BlueLink, Acland's Videos, and Complete Anatomy (P < 0.05). This study provided evidence of how gross anatomy educators continued to adapt their courses past the early stages of the pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) created unparalleled challenges to anatomy education. Gross anatomy education has been particularly impacted given the traditional in-person format of didactic instruction and/or laboratory component(s). To assess the changes in gross anatomy lecture and laboratory instruction, assessment, and teaching resources utilized as a result of COVID-19, a survey was distributed to gross anatomy educators through professional associations and listservs. Of the 67 survey responses received for the May-August 2020 academic period, 84% were from United States (US) institutions, while 16% were internationally based. Respondents indicated that in-person lecture decreased during COVID-19 (before: 76%, during: 8%, P < 0.001) and use of cadaver materials declined (before: 76 ± 33%, during: 34 ± 43%, P < 0.001). The use of cadaver materials in laboratories decreased during Covid-19 across academic programs, stand-alone and integrated anatomy courses, and private and public institutions (P [less than or equal to] 0.004). Before COVID-19, cadaveric materials used in laboratories were greater among professional health programs relative to medical and undergraduate programs (P [less than or equal to] 0.03) and among stand-alone relative to integrated anatomy courses (P [less than or equal to] 0.03). Furthermore, computer-based assessment increased (P < 0.001) and assessment materials changed from cadaveric material to images (P < 0.03) during COVID-19, even though assessment structure was not different (P > 0.05). The use of digital teaching resources increased during COVID-19 (P < 0.001), with reports of increased use of in-house created content, BlueLink, and Complete Anatomy software (P < 0.05). While primarily representing US institutions, this study provided evidence of how anatomy educators adapted their courses, largely through virtual mediums, and modified laboratory protocols during the initial emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic.