Evaluation of a Hands‐On Anatomy‐Centered Ultrasound Curriculum in a Graduate Gross Anatomy Course
Authors: Royer Danielle , Kessler Ross , Stowell Jeffrey 
Published: November 2023

Ultrasound (US) training is increasingly integrated into medical school curricula, where it may be used to enhance anatomy education, yet few non‐medical anatomy courses incorporate US training. We developed and evaluated an innovative anatomy‐centered ultrasound (ACUS) curriculum integrated with a graduate dissection‐based gross anatomy course. The innovative ACUS curriculum consisted of six 1 hour hands‐on active learning US sessions in which groups of 2–3 students performed live peer scanning, guided by 2 MDs and 1 PhD anatomist trained in US. Thirty‐two first year Master's students enrolled in an anatomy course with the integrated ACUS curriculum were invited to participate in the IRB‐exempted study. Pre‐ and post‐course online surveys were used to collect data on demographics and previous US training. In addition, surveys employed a 5‐point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree) to measure student self‐perceived confidence across a range of US skills, as well as their perceptions of the value of US to anatomy education and their future careers. Paired‐sample t‐tests were used to compare pre‐ and post‐course ratings. A 20‐question anonymous quiz was offered after the end of the course to assess performance across 3 knowledge areas: machine usage, normal tissue identification, anatomical structure identification. A one‐way ANOVA was used to compare student performance between knowledge areas. Pre‐ and post‐course survey response rates were 100%, with roughly equal gender distribution. While 91% of students reported some prior exposure to US, only 53% had prior hands‐on training; the most common prior experience was a one‐time demo and scan session. Comparisons of pre‐ and post‐course confidence ratings show that student confidence increased significantly (p < 0.001) in 5 out 7 US skills: obtaining scans, optimizing image quality, recognizing artifacts, distinguishing normal tissues, identifying normal anatomy (pre‐course weighted average = 2.9 ±0.12; post‐course weighted average = 4.0 ±0.12). In contrast, no significant change (p > 0.05) was observed in students’ confidence in the following skills: understanding US physics, understanding US biosafety. Student perceptions of the value of US to anatomy education were overwhelmingly positive in both pre‐course and postcourse surveys (weighted averages = 4.2 ±0.08 and 4.1 ±0.15 respectively; p > 0.05). Likewise, students expressed positive views on the importance of US to their future careers both before and after completing the ACUS course (weighted averages = 4.2 ±0.13 and 4.3 ±0.12 respectively; p > 0.05). The response rate for the knowledge quiz was 91%. The mean quiz score was 79%, ranging from 55% to 100%. Student performance was highest on tissue type identification questions (mean = 90% ±8.7), lowest on anatomical structure identification questions (mean = 67% ±17.3), and they scored a mean of 79% (±21.2) on the machine usage questions. Differences in performance across the 3 knowledge categories were not significant (p = 0.09). An integrated ACUS curriculum significantly increased self‐perceived confidence across most US skills and successfully increased knowledge of US among Master's students with limited prior training in US. Graduate students greatly valued the contributions that US can make to learning anatomy and to their careers. Anatomy education across both medical and non‐medical settings may benefit from the integration of US training.