Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Student Perceptions of the Use of Case-Based Cadaver Dissections in Doctorate of Physical Therapy Program

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Case-based cadaver dissection offers students unique opportunities to blend traditional anatomic knowledge acquisition with clinical reasoning. Twelve physical therapy students completed surveys centered on case-based dissections. Case-based cadaver dissections were defined in this study as multiple clinical vignettes that required students to use the accessible cadavers to solve clinically based problems. The results of the study provide preliminary evidence that students perceive case-based cadaver dissections as beneficial to their anatomy education and beneficial to the development of their clinical reasoning skills.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Availability of Data and Material

Data is stored with the primary investigator.

References

  1. Øberg GK, Normann B, Gallagher S. Embodied-enactive clinical reasoning in physical therapy. Physiother Theory Pract. 2015;31(4):244–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jeyakumar A, Dissanayake B, Dissabandara L. Dissection in the modern medical curriculum: an exploration into student perception and adaptions for the future. Anat Sci Educ. 2020;13(3):366–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Thompson KL, Gendreau JL, Strickling JE, Young HE. Cadaveric dissection in relation to problem-based learning case sequencing: a report of medical student musculoskeletal examination performances and self-confidence. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12(6):619–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ. 2007;41(1):15–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. American Physical Therapy Association. Physical therapist clinical performance instrument: Version 2006. Alexandria, VA, USA: American Physical Therapy Association.

  6. Higgs J, Jones MA, Loftus S, Christensen N. editors. Clinical reasoning in the health profession. 3rd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2008.

  7. Furze J, Black L, Hoffman J, Barr JB, Cochran TM, Jensen GM. Exploration of students’ clinical reasoning development in professional physical therapy education. J Phys Ther Educ. 2015;29(3):22–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stickley L. Creating significant learning experiences for clinical reasoning by physical therapist students. Internet J Allied Health Sci Pract. 2019;17(1):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moon M, O’Donoghue D, Miller F, Klump K, Halliday N. Case-based learning using cadaveric pathology specimens enhances learner engagement in reviewing normal anatomy. FASEB J. 2017;31(1_supplement):512–582.

  10. Estai M, Bunt S. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: a critical review. Annals of Anatomy-Anatomischer Anzeiger. 2016;208:151–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Edwards I, Jones M, Carr J, Braunack-Mayer A, Jensen GM. Clinical reasoning strategies in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2004;84(4):312–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Parmar SK, Rathinam BAD. Introduction of vertical integration and case-based learning in anatomy for undergraduate physical therapy and occupational therapy students. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4(3):170–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sodhi G, Ranniger C, Slaby F, Blatt B. A-PEX: a case-based integrated physical diagnosis/anatomy program for first year medical students. Med Sci Educ. 2011;21(4):330–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Boehler ML, Rogers DA, Schwind CJ, Fortune J, Ketchum J, Dunnington G. A senior elective designed to prepare medical students for surgical residency. Am J Surg. 2004;187(6):695–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Peeler J, Bergen H, Bulow A. Musculoskeletal anatomy education: evaluating the influence of different teaching and learning activities on medical students perception and academic performance. Ann Anat. 2018;219:44–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Boyles RE, Gorman I, Pinto D, Ross MD. Physical therapist practice and the role of diagnostic imaging. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41(11):829–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Massey BF Jr. What’s all the fuss about direct access?. Phys Ther. 2002;82(11):1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Entezari M, Javdan M. Active learning and flipped classroom, hand in hand approach to improve students learning in human anatomy and physiology. Int J High Educ. 2016;5(4):222–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lemoncello R. Blended, active learning for anatomy & physiology: development & program evaluation. Perspectives on Issues in Higher Education. 2015;18(2):62–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Harris MJ, Hinman MR, Marcoux BC, Swisher LL. Happy 40th year—you’ve come a long way, CAPTE!. J Phys Ther Educ. 2018;32(1):2–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Brismée JM, Pape JL, Woodhouse LJ, Reid D, Bellot N, Matthijs OC, Reumont F, Sobczak S. Reflections and future directions on extending physical therapist scope of practice to improve quality of care and preserve health care resources. Phys Ther. 2018;98(10):827–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Langridge N, Roberts L, Pope C. Original article: The clinical reasoning processes of extended scope physiotherapists assessing patients with low back pain. Man Ther. 2015;20:745–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Therapy, Methodist University, Fayetteville, NC, USA

    Matthew Condo & Blake Justice

Authors
  1. Matthew Condo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Blake Justice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Condo.

Ethics declarations

Code Availability (software application or custom code)

N/A

IRB approval 2019 20 0017.

Consent to Participate was Received in Writing from All Study Participants

Consent for publication was received from the Methodist University Institutional Review Board.

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.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 14 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 34 KB)

Appendices

Appendix A

Lab Report #1

A 54-year-old office executive went to the emergency department complaining of sudden chest and left arm pain. He is pale, diaphoretic, and reports feeling nauseated. Differential diagnoses include gastric and musculoskeletal etiologies, myocardial infarction, pericarditis, and myocarditis. He smokes one pack of cigarettes per day and has elevated blood pressure and cholesterol levels. He also has diabetes mellitus and a history of atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease.

  1. 1.

    Measure the width of the heart from the apex to the base.

  2. 2.

    Measure the width of the rib cage at the diaphragmatic edge of the heart.

  3. 3.

    Divide the rib cage width by the cardiac width.

  4. 4.

    Determine if the cardiac tissue is above or below the recommended 50% threshold.

  5. 5.

    Inspect the coronary arteries, sinuses, and veins. Detect any bypasses, blockages, or other obstructions.

  6. 6.

    Is a pacemaker or defibrillator present? What implications would those devices have on the case?

  7. 7.

    Inspect the pulmonary veins and arteries (if present). Detect any blockages and/or obstructions. What implications would blockages of these vessels have?

  8. 8.

    Inspect the atria and ventricles. Look at any abnormalities that may exist either in the valves, chordae tendineae, or papillary muscle. Report on any findings and potential implications for the case.

Lab Report #2

A physical therapist receives a referral for a patient with right shoulder pain. The patient is a 22-year-old male. The patient reports that his right shoulder pain started about 2 months ago and cannot recall any mechanism of injury. The patient reports that no specific motions increased the pain and he seems to only have pain around 3am. The pain usually wakes the patient up.

Past medical history is positive for the following: torn ACL in high school, wisdom tooth removal, and one ankle fracture. The patient also reports that he uses chewing tobacco and alcohol daily. The patient reports that he usually takes 3-4 Tylenol daily for pain control.

Objective exam revealed full PROM, full AROM, and 5/5 strength throughout the right shoulder.

  1. 1.

    View the visceral organs using a regional format. Chart the organs based on position within the viscera. Which organs would be most likely to refer pain to the right shoulder?

  2. 2.

    Organize the organs based on function and make a chart. Each organ has a different function. Start looking for patterns between the case presentation and the organ function chart.

  3. 3.

    Based on your findings, make a shortlist of three possible diagnoses. State why each of these diagnoses is plausible and why each diagnosis might be incorrect.

  4. 4.

    State your final diagnosis and why you think it is the correct diagnosis.

Lab Report #3

A 36-year-old patient presents in a physical therapy office with a diagnosis of sciatica. The patient states that he has the following symptoms: left-sided lower back pain that radiates down the posterior aspect of the left thigh to the knee.

When asked, the patient also states that he has noticed that he has difficulty holding his urine and pain during the night. The patient notes that the following activities increase symptoms: sitting for a long period of time, driving, rolling over in bed, and pain with prolonged walking.

  1. 1.

    Map out the lumbosacral plexus. Take note of the nerves and their root levels.

  2. 2.

    Look at the different symptoms and create a list of the possible nerves involved.

  3. 3.

    With the case presented, hypothesize whether what specific type of nerve or nerves may be involved (GVE, GSE, BE, etc.).

  4. 4.

    Create a list of 3 possible differential diagnoses. Explain why each could be a possibility and why each may be incorrect.

  5. 5.

    Hypothesize if the patient’s complaints of bladder changes are relevant to this case and potential pathology.

  6. 6.

    Arrive at a final diagnosis and defend your answer.

Appendix B

Five-Point Likert Scale Questions

  1. 1.

    Cadaver study has assisted my anatomy education

  2. 2.

    I clearly see a purpose in my cadaver dissection

Open-Ended Qualitative Questions

  1. 3.

    How did the case-based lab reports help guide your study in anatomy?

  2. 4.

    How did the case-based lab reports help with the development of your clinical reasoning skills?

  3. 5.

    What things worked well with your cadaver dissection?

  4. 6.

    What things would you change with your cadaver dissection?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Condo, M., Justice, B. Student Perceptions of the Use of Case-Based Cadaver Dissections in Doctorate of Physical Therapy Program. Med.Sci.Educ. 32, 679–682 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01540-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01540-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation