AN INSIGHT INTO VETERINARY STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE USE OF 3D-PRINTED BONE BIOMODELS IN ANATOMY LEARNING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26873/SVR-1686-2023Keywords:
veterinary anatomy education, 3D printing, bone biomodel, student perspectiveAbstract
Today, conventional teaching methods are losing their effectiveness at transferring knowledge and skills, prompting the presentation of alternative strategies that hold more promise. One of the innovative alternative education materials in veterinary anatomy education is the models produced on three-dimensional (3D) printers. The subject of this study is 4 different bone biomodels 3D modeled and printed with reference to cadaver-derived bones. In the study, a total of 298 students were asked to evaluate these biomodels in terms of their similarity to the reference bones. According to the survey, 75.5% of the students stated that their biomodel resembled the reference bones. In addition, 64.8% of these students stated that the use of biomodels can be efficient in learning the skeletal system. These outcomes showed that a sample from each of the 4 main bone types could be replicated on a 3D printer with an acceptable similarity ratio. Based on student opinions about these four different biomodels, we think that 3d printed biomodels deserve to be evaluated as an alternative in anatomy education.
VPOGLED V MNENJE ŠTUDENTOV VETERINE O UPORABI 3D-TISKANIH BIOLOŠKIH MODELOV KOSTI PRI UČENJU ANATOMIJE
Izvleček: Danes običajne metode poučevanja izgubljajo svojo učinkovitost pri prenosu znanja in spretnosti, zato bi bilo potrebno spodbujati alternativne, bolj obetavne strategije. Eno od inovativnih alternativnih učnih gradiv pri pouku veterinarske anatomije so modeli, izdelani na tridimenzionalnih (3D) tiskalnikih. Predmet te študije so štirje različni biološki modeli kosti, pripravljeni s 3D modeliranjem in tiskanjem, osnovani na kosteh, pridobljenih iz trupel. V študiji je bilo skupaj 298 študentov naprošenih, da ocenijo te biološke modele glede na njihovo podobnost s pravimi kostmi. 75,5 % študentov je navedlo, da je njihov biološki model podoben referenčnim kostem. Poleg tega je 64,8 % teh študentov izjavilo, da je uporaba bioloških modelov lahko učinkovita pri učenju skeletnega sistema. Ti rezultati so pokazali, da je mogoče vsakega od 4 glavnih tipov kosti kopirati na 3D-tiskalniku s sprejemljivim razmerjem podobnosti. Na podlagi mnenj študentov o teh štirih različnih bioloških modelih menimo, da bi 3D-tiskani biološki modeli lahko bili vrednoteni kot alternativni pripomoček pri izobraževalnem procesu anatomije.
Ključne besede: poučevanje anatomije v veterini; 3D tiskanje; biološki model kosti; perspektiva študentov
References
● 1. McLachlan JC, Bligh J, Bradley P, Searle J. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med Educ 2004; 38: 418–24.
● 2. Groscurth P, Eggli P, Kapfhammer J, Rager G, Hornung JP, Fasel J. Gross anatomy in the surgical curriculum in Switzerland: improved cadaver preservation, anatomical models, and course development. Anat Rec 2001; 265: 254–6.
● 3. Hart LA, Wood MW, Weng H-Y. Mainstreaming alternatives in veterinary medical education: resource development and curricular reform. J Vet Med Educ 2005; 32: 473–80.
● 4. McMenamin PG, Quayle MR, McHenry CR, Adams JW. The production of anatomical teaching resources using three‐dimensional (3D) printing technology. Anat Sci Educ 2014; 7: 479–86.
● 5. Persaud TVN. Early history of human anatomy: from antiquity to the beginning of the modern era. Illinois: Charles C Thomas Publisher, 1984.
● 6. Bickley HC, Von Hagens G, Townsend F. An improved method for the preservation of teaching specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1981; 105: 674–6.
● 7. McLachlan JC, Patten D. Anatomy teaching: ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ 2006; 40: 243–53.
● 8. Oh CS, Kim JY, Choe YH. Learning of cross‐sectional anatomy using clay models. Anat Sci Educ 2009;2:156–9.
● 9. Dinsmore CE, Daugherty S, Zeitz HJ. Teaching and learning gross anatomy: dissection, prosection, or “both of the above?”. Clin Anat 1999; 12: 110–4.
● 10. Lioufas PA, Quayle MR, Leong JC, McMenamin PG. 3D printed models of cleft palate pathology for surgical education. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 4: e1029. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001029
● 11. Lipson H, Kurman M. Fabricated: the new world of 3D printing. Indianapolis: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
● 12. Murphy S, Atala A. 3D bioprinting of tissues and organs: Nat Biotechnol 2014; 32: 773–85.
● 13. Kurenov SN, Ionita C, Sammons D, Demmy TL. Three-dimensional printing to facilitate anatomic study, device development, simulation, and planning in thoracic surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 149: 973–9.
● 14. Li F, Liu C, Song X, Huan Y, Gao S, Jiang Z. Production of accurate skeletal models of domestic animals using three‐dimensional scanning and printing technology. Anat Sci Educ 2018; 11: 73–80.
● 15. Lim KHA, Loo ZY, Goldie SJ, Adams JW, McMenamin PG. Use of 3D printed models in medical education: a randomized control trial comparing 3D prints versus cadaveric materials for learning external cardiac anatomy. Anat Sci Educ 2016; 9: 213–21.
● 16. Guevar J. The evolution of educational technology in veterinary anatomy education. Adv Exp Med Biol 2020; 8: 13–25.
● 17. Demirkan AC, Akalan MA, Ozdemir V, Akosman MS, Turkmenoglu I. Investigating the effects of veterinary medicine students’ learning by using the real skeleton models on anatomy theorical and practical lessons. Kocatepe Vet J 2016; 9: 266–72.
● 18. Abood SK, Siegford JM. Student perceptions of an animal-welfare and ethics course taught early in the veterinary curriculum. J Vet Med Educ 2012; 39: 136–41.
● 19. Lairmore MD, Ilkiw J. Animals used in research and education, 1966–2016: evolving attitudes, policies, and relationships. J Vet Med Educ 2015; 42: 425–40.
● 20. Allouch G. Scientific technique for skeletons preservation and preparation of anatomical models to promote veterinary anatomy. J Vet Anat 2014; 7: 133–9.
● 21. Ajao M, Adepoju O, Olayaki A, et al. Physical reactions of Nigerian health sciences students to formaldehyde used as cadaver preservatives. Res J Appl Sci 2011; 6: 20–4.
● 22. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Off J Eur Union 2010; L276: e33–79. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/eur98296.pdf
● 23. Levine ED, Mills DS, Houpt KA. Attitudes of veterinary students at one US college toward factors relating to farm animal welfare. J Vet Med Educ 2005; 32: 481–90.
● 24. Main DC, Thornton P, Kerr K. Teaching animal welfare science, ethics, and law to veterinary students in the United Kingdom. J Vet Med Educ 2005; 32: 505–8.
● 25. Ozen R, Ozen A. Attitudes of Erciyes university students to the use of animals in research. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak Derg 2010; 16: 477–81.
● 26. Pereira G, Dieguez J, Salgirli Demirbaş Y, Menache A. Alternatives to animal use in veterinary education: a growing debate. Ankara Univ Vet Fak Derg 2017; 64: 235–9.
● 27. Kocyigit A, Narlicay S. The production of testis biomodels using three‐dimensional (3D) technologies. Andrologia 2021; 53: e14171. doi: 10.1111/and.14171
● 28. Küçükaslan Ö, Erdoğan S, Bulut I. Turkish undergraduate veterinary students’ attitudes to use of animals and other teaching alternatives for learning anatomy. J Vet Med Educ 2019; 46: 116–27.
● 29. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ 2010; 3: 83–93.
● 30. Granger NA: Dissection laboratory is vital to medical gross anatomy education. Anat Rec B New Anat 2004; 281: 6–8.
● 31. Mennecart B, Costeur L. A Dorcatherium (mammalia, ruminantia, middle miocene) petrosal bone and the tragulid ear region. J Vertebr Paleontol 2016; 36 : e1211665. doi: 10.1080/02724634.2016.1211665
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Alper Koçyiğit *, Hasan Huseyin Ari, Baris Atalay Uslu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
