World Journal of Pharmaceutical
and Medical Research

( An ISO 9001:2015 Certified International Journal )

An International Peer Reviewed Journal for Pharmaceutical and Medical Research and Technology
An Official Publication of Society for Advance Healthcare Research (Reg. No. : 01/01/01/31674/16)
ISSN (O) : 2455-3301
ISSN (P) : 3051-2557
IMPACT FACTOR: 7.533

ICV : 78.6

World Journal of Pharmaceutical and Medical Research (WJPMR) has indexed with various reputed international bodies like : Google Scholar , Index Copernicus , SOCOLAR, China , Indian Science Publications , Cosmos Impact Factor , Research Bible, Fuchu, Tokyo. JAPAN , Scientific Indexing Services (SIS) , UDLedge Science Citation Index , International Impact Factor Services , International Society for Research Activity (ISRA) Journal Impact Factor (JIF) , International Innovative Journal Impact Factor (IIJIF) , Scientific Journal Impact Factor (SJIF) , Global Impact Factor (In Process) , Digital Online Identifier-Database System (DOI-DS) , Science Library Index, Dubai, United Arab Emirates , Eurasian Scientific Journal Index (ESJI) , International Scientific Indexing, (ISI) UAE , IFSIJ Measure of Journal Quality , Web of Science Group (Under Process) , Directory of Research Journals Indexing , Scholar Article Journal Index (SAJI) , International Scientific Indexing ( ISI ) , Scope Database , Academia , Doi-Digital Online Identifier , ISSN National Centre , Zenodo Indexing , International CODEN Service, USA , 

Abstract

“PERCEPTION OF BAMS STUDENTS ON ANATOMAGE TABLE VERSUS CADAVERIC DISSECTION IN LEARNING HUMAN ANATOMY: A PRELIMINARY CROSS-SECTIONAL SURVEY STUDY

Dr. Sajina P. S.*, Dr. Divya K., Ms. Sadhana Bhat

ABSTRACT

Background: Technological advancements have introduced virtual dissection tools such as the Anatomage Table into medical education. However, cadaveric dissection remains a traditional and integral component of anatomy learning. This study aimed to evaluate BAMS students’ perceptions of both methods in learning anatomy. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 232 undergraduate medical students from different academic years who had exposure to both the methods. Convenience sampling was employed. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Results: Among the participants, 77.15% were female and 22.85% were male. The Anatomage Table was preferred for identifying smaller anatomical structures such as arteries (41.81%), veins (40.09%), nerves (38.79%), and lymph nodes (47.41%). In contrast, cadaveric dissection was favored for studying larger structures, including bones (71.55%), muscles (70.26%), joints (59.48%), ligaments (46.55%), and organs (75%). Dissection was also perceived as superior for understanding spatial relationships, anatomical variations, and clinical correlations, while the Anatomage Table was considered more time-efficient and useful for quick revision. Conclusion: While the Anatomage Table enhances visualization and understanding of finer anatomical details, cadaveric dissection remains the preferred method for studying larger structures and developing tactile and three-dimensional understanding. A blended approach integrating both methods may optimize anatomy education.

[Full Text Article]    [Download Certificate]

Powered By WJPMR | All Right Reserved

WJPMR