Abstract
There is an ongoing debate in anatomy education regarding the use of prosection versus student dissection in anatomy lab instruction. While there are plenty of studies comparing dissection and prosection, there are very few studies on how prosections are prepared and how they are used in anatomy instruction. Furthermore, there is no consistent definition of prosection used in the literature. This study used an anonymous questionnaire distributed to anatomy educators internationally and asked for educator views on defining, preparing, and using prosections in various course settings. One-hundred twenty-five completed responses representing fifteen countries and sixty-seven institutions underwent a thematic analysis to describe major themes in participant responses. From responses, a definition of prosection was developed, and the major perceived strengths and weaknesses of prosection use were described. Furthermore, quantitative data regarding the prevalence of prosection use as either a supplemental or primary resource and details pertaining to the perceived expertise of prosectors was collected. This study demonstrates the extensive reach of prosections in anatomy education and sets a foundation from which future studies on unique prosection preparation and use can stem from.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of Data and Material
Not applicable.
References
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.117.
Ghosh SK. Cadaveric dissection as an educational tool for anatomical sciences in the 21st century. Anat Sci Educ. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1649.
Habbal O. The state of human anatomy teaching in the medical schools of Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: present and future perspectives. SQU Med J 2009. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3074750/.
Wilson AB, Miller CH, Klein BA, Taylor MA, Goodwin M, Boyle EK, Brown K, Hoppe C, Lazarus M. A meta-analysis of anatomy laboratory pedagogies. Clin Anat. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22934.
Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Rec. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.10046.
Elizondo-Omaña RE, Guzmán-López S, De Los Angeles García-Rodríguez M. Dissection as a teaching tool: past, present, and future. Anat Rec 2005. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.20070.
Ramsey-Stewart G, Burgess AW, Hill DA. Back to the future: teaching anatomy by whole-body dissection. MJA. 2010. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb04099.x.
Kinirons SA, Reddin VM, Maguffin J. Effects of alternating dissection with peer teaching and faculty prosected cadaver demonstrations in a physical therapy and occupational therapy gross anatomy course. Anat Sci Edu. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1833.
Granger NA. Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. Anat Rec. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.20039.
Thompson AR, Marshall AM. Participation in dissection affects student performance on gross anatomy practical and written examinations: results of a four-year comparative study. Anat Sci Edu. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1859.
Williams SR, Thompson KL, Notebaert AJ, Sinning AR. Prosection or dissection: which is best for teaching the anatomy of the hand and foot? Anat Sci Educ. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1808.
Topp KS. Prosection vs dissection, the debate continues: rebuttal to Granger. Anat Rec. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.20037.
Dinsmore CE, Daugherty S, Zeitz HJ. Teaching and learning gross anatomy: dissection, prosection, or “both of the above?” Clin Anat. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2353(1999)12:2%3c110::AID-CA5%3e3.0.CO;2-3.
Aziz M, Kernick ET, Dallaghan GLB, Gilliland KO. Dissection versus prosection: a comparison of laboratory practical examinations. Med Sci Edu. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00839-6.
Johnson JH. Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: personal dissection versus peer teaching. Clin Anat. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.1090.
McWatt SC, Newton GS, Umphrey GJ, Jadeski LC. Dissection versus prosection: a comparative assessment of the course experiences, approaches to learning, and academic performance of non-medical undergraduate students in human anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1993.
Bergman EM, Van Der Vleuten CPM, Scherpbier AJJA. Why don’t they know enough about anatomy? A narrative review Med Teach. 2011. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2010.536276.
Estai M, Bunt S. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: a critical review. Ann Anat. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2016.02.010.
Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02625.x.
von Hagens Plastination. What is plastination? Real anatomy for teaching 2022. https://vonhagens-plastination.com/pages/medical-teaching-specimens/von-hagens-plastination.php/plastination.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde J. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81.
Kiger ME, Varpio L. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE guide No. 131. Med Teach 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1755030.
Mattingly S, Hardesty E, Chovanec K, Cobos ME, Garcia J, Grizzle M, Huerta A, Ohtake J, Romero-Alverez D, Gonzalez VH. Differences between attached and detached cadaveric prosections on students’ identification ability during practical examinations. Anat Sci Educ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.2023.
Cornwall J. The diverse utility of wet prosections and plastinated specimens in teaching gross anatomy in New Zealand. Anat Sci Edu. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.245.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2353(1996)9:4%3c258::AID-CA8%3e3.0.CO;2-A.
Lackey-Cornelison WL, Bauler LD, Smith J. A comparison of the effectiveness of dissection and prosection on short-term anatomic retention in a reciprocal peer-teaching program. Adv Physiol Edu. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00031.2020.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank all individuals who participated in this study by completing the associated questionnaire.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
This study was approved by the University of Mississippi Medical Center Internal Review Board (#2019–0270).
Consent to Participate
All participants voluntarily consented to participate in this study.
Consent for Publication
All participants were informed and consented to the publication of the study findings.
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
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Curran, S.N., Schaefer, A.F. Prosections in Anatomy Education: Establishing a Definition and Describing Preparation, Use, and Educator Perceptions. Med.Sci.Educ. 33, 385–393 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-023-01745-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-023-01745-8