Evaluating the Use of 3D Printed Models in Graduate and Undergraduate Human Neuroanatomy Courses
Authors: DeVeau Kathryn M. , Brown Kirsten M. , Spencer Marc , Javan Ramin , Fleming Cullen 
Published: April 2020

Background

Neuroanatomy is three‐dimensionally complex, and students struggle to comprehend the anatomical relationships of brain and deep brain structures. In order to mitigate ambiguity, unique learning tools and techniques are highly sought after. Custom‐built 3D printed models have the potential to be useful for neuroanatomy education. Although recent work has indicated that incorporating 3D printing in the anatomical sciences can lead to improvements in educational outcomes (e.g., exam performances and student satisfaction), much of the current research is limited by the discipline (e.g., gross anatomy or embryology) and the student populations (e.g., undergraduates). Our primary objective was to determine the efficacy of custom‐build, 3D printed models on learning neuroanatomical concepts in graduate students. We sought to test the hypothesis that 3D models can lead to increased student knowledge retention and increased satisfaction during learning.

Methods

At the beginning of two, regularly scheduled 75 minutes prosection neuroanatomy laboratory periods, consenting graduate students (lab 1 n=16; lab 2 n=19) completed a 10‐question baseline knowledge assessment (pre‐test) consisting of multiple choice questions (MCQs) and short answer questions (SAs). After students were randomly assigned to one of two groups ‐ a 3D printed model group that worked with custom‐printed neuroanatomy models or a prosection group that reviewed neuroanatomy on human specimens. After working with either models or specimens for 20 minutes, participants completed the same 10 question test (post‐test) and an anonymous 10 question survey on their perceptions of the teaching modalities. Groups then switched so each student could review neuroanatomy on both the prosections and models. Differences in pre‐and post‐test scores between groups and within group were compared using t‐tests R‐software (v.3.6.0) for each laboratory session.

Results

Student respondents either mostly or strongly agreed (85%) that they would like to see 3D printed models used more in anatomical courses. Similarly, students agreed (77%) that the models stimulated their interest in neuroanatomy. There were no performance differences between the model and prosection group in pre‐and post‐tests comparison for either laboratory session.(lab 1 pre‐test p=.342, post‐test p=0.5; lab 2 pre‐test p=0.5, post‐test p=0.432).

Discussion

The 3D models were not only well received by the students and but also stimulated their interest in neuroanatomy. There were no performance differences between the two groups, suggesting that the models are just as effective at enhancing learning as working with human prosections. Since these models are cost‐effective, easy to transport, and make smaller structures easy to visualize, incorporating them would be ideal for institutions or programs that do not have access to cadaveric resources. In the future, we hope to use these models with other cohorts of students and to continue to find ways to improve their utility.