Skip to main content

Importance of Anatomy Education on Electrotherapy Lectures in Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Curricula: Student Perceptions of a Foundation University

Abstract

Student opinions are important to improve the physiotherapy and rehabilitation curriculum, and to maintain the quality of education. This study aimed to evaluate the students’ perception levels related to anatomy education in terms of electrotherapy lectures. Third and fourth-year physiotherapy students (61 female, 43 male) have voluntarily participated in this study. The data were obtained by a survey, which consists of 29 closed-ended (15 Likert-type questions) questions. The average age was 21.82 ± 1.62 years. The grade point average of the participants, which is based on the 4-point scale, is 2.33 ± 0.44 points. There was no difference between the genders in terms of the grade point averages (p = 0.78). Students stated that the anatomy knowledge of the musculoskeletal system is extremely important in terms of electrotherapy lectures. This is followed by the nervous system and the circulatory system, respectively. They also stated that they need more anatomy knowledge during motor point stimulation applications (50%), and less anatomy knowledge during ultrasound applications (15.38%). In the results of Likert-type survey, first and second highest scores were pertained to “I need anatomy knowledge when inserting electrodes” and “The knowledge which is obtained from anatomy lectures affect to the motor nerve stimulations” (1.42 ± 0.67 and 1.40 ± 0.66, respectively, p < 0.05) and the least score was pertained to “I need to look at my anatomy notes before the electrotherapy exams” (0.41 ± 0.88, p < 0.05). The results from this study help to enhance our conceptual understanding of students’ perception levels of anatomy education importance in terms of electrotherapy lectures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Salian SC, Singh J. Perception of recent physiotherapy graduates regarding electrotherapy in undergraduate curriculum content. Int J Physiother Res. 2016;4(2):1468–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Watson T. The role of electrotherapy in contemporary physiotherapy practice. Manualtherapy. 2000;5(3):132–41.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Ocak MA, Topal AD. Blended learning in anatomy education: a study investigating medical students’ perceptions. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ. 2015;11(3):647–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    McLachlan JC, Patten D. Anatomy teaching: ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ. 2006;40(3):243–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Shead D, Roos R, Olivier B, Ihunwo AO. Opinions of South African physiotherapists on gross anatomy education for physiotherapy students. S Afr J Physiother. 2019;75(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Díaz-Fernández Á, Jiménez-Delgado JJ, Osuna-Pérez MC, Rueda-Ruiz A, Paulano-Godino F. Development and implementation of a mobile application to improve university teaching of electrotherapy. International Conference on Interactive Mobile Communication, Technologies and Learning. 2016; 33–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMCTL.2016.7753766

  7. 7.

    Arasil T, Kayhan Ö. The status of rehabilitation in Turkey. Disabil Rehabil. 1997;19(9):379–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Forgey SB, Williams MR, Pribesh S. Pathways to success in anatomy and physiology at the community college: the role of prerequisite courses. Community Coll Enterp. 2020;26(1):9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Fink A. The survey handbook. 2nd ed. London: Sage; 2003.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Gürses HN, Alemdaroğlu İ, Tanriverdi M. Türkiye’de Fizyoterapi ve rehabilitasyon fakülte bölümü/yüksekokullarinin incelenmesi ve müfredat analizi. Türk Fiz Rehab Derg. 2014;25(1):3.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kocamaz D, Yakut H, Özberk S. Patients’ satisfaction with and awareness of electrical stimulation therapy. Physiother Q. 2020;28(1):11–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Skovholt K. Anatomy of a teacher–student feedback encounter. Teach Teach Educ. 2018;69:142–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Penny AR. Changing the agenda for research into students’ views about university teaching: four shortcomings of SRT research. Teach in High Educ. 2003;8(3):399–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Turhan B. Physiotherapy and rehabilitation students’ opinions on anatomy education: a cross-sectional survey study. Physiother Q. 2020;28(2):46–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Botter A, Oprandi G, Lanfranco F, Allasia S, Maffiuletti NA, Minetto MA. Atlas of the muscle motor points for the lower limb: implications for electrical stimulation procedures and electrode positioning. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011;111(10):2461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Klement BJ, Paulsen DF, Wineski LE. Anatomy as the backbone of an integrated first year medical curriculum: design and implementation. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4(3):157–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Otag I, Otag A. Students’ opinions on human anatomy and physiology. Cumhuriyet Int J Educ. 2013;2(3):39–45.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Adamczyk JG, Boguszewski D, Debrzak-Adamczyk I, Ochal A. Opinie fizjoterapeutów na temat przygotowania przez uczelnie do pracy w zawodzie. Physiotherapy/Fizjoterapia. 2012;20(3):41–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kızıl H, Şendir M. Innovative approaches in nursing education. J Hum Sci. 2019;16(1):118–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Williams CA. Nurse educators meet your new students: generation Z. Nurse Educ. 2019;44(2):59–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Balogun JA, Aka P, Balogun AO, Obajuluwa VA. A phenomenological investigation of the first two decades of university-based physiotherapy education in Nigeria. Cogent Med. 2017;4(1):2–18.

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Turhan B, Özbay Y. Erken çocukluk eğitimi ve nöroplastisite. Uluslararası Erken Çocukluk Eğitimi Çalışmaları Derg. 2016;1(2):54–63.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deniz Kocamaz.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

2019/113.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Turhan, B., Kocamaz, D. Importance of Anatomy Education on Electrotherapy Lectures in Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Curricula: Student Perceptions of a Foundation University. Med.Sci.Educ. 31, 1669–1675 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01358-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Anatomy education
  • Basic science
  • Electrotherapy
  • Physiotherapy education
  • Student perception