Scholarlink

Introduction <p>The approach to integrating relevant anatomy in the medical curriculum has been debated for many years. Current literature has explored the broad impact of 3D printing in medical education. However, there is little evidence on 3D printing for the teaching of musculoskeletal oncology (MSO). This is a self-controlled case series (SCCS) study that aims to analyse the effectiveness of 3D printed models in MSO in enhancing the learning experience, engagement and understanding of clinical and surgical anatomy for medical students.</p> Method <p>A cross-sectional cohort study involving 75 clinical year medical students across 3 years from 2 medical schools that rotated through a single teaching hospital’s orthopaedic department. Participants first viewed a set of computed-tomography (CT) images of a large pelvic osteosarcoma from a free open-source database, the Cancer Genome Atlas Sarcoma Collection (TCGA-SARC). A standardised 10-minute pre-intervention questionnaire which comprised 15 questions categorised by: 4 questions in ‘anatomical knowledge’, 7 questions in ‘spatial awareness’, 4 questions in ‘surgical planning and complications’, was administered to assess the baseline knowledge in their interpretation of the pathology via CT images only. Next, a 3D-printed model of the pelvic osteosarcoma, which included colour-coded adjacent structures, was provided as an adjunct to answer the same questionnaire. This concluded with a 5-point Likert scale feedback survey to gauge their perspectives and experience. </p> Results <p>The mean scores comparing their pre- and post-intervention assessment questionnaire increased by +1.34 from 8.15 (SD = 1.85) to 9.49 (SD = 1.7) (p &lt; 0.001). The final year students had the greatest improvement of +1.54 from 8.00 (SD = 1.89) to 9.54 (SD = 1.59) (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the scores amongst the 2 medical schools. 91% of students agreed that the 3D model had helped them further their understanding of the anatomy of the sarcoma and 87% would want 3D printing models to augment their learning in anatomy. Baseline weaker students demonstrated significantly greater improvement in scores compared with baseline stronger students (mean difference +2.04 vs +0.30, p &lt; 0.001).</p> Conclusion <p>3D printing is an effective teaching adjunct for musculoskeletal oncology surgical anatomy for medical undergraduates and could be used to enhance their understanding and learning experience. 3D models could be integrated in the teaching curriculum of surgical anatomy for undergraduate students.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The use of 3-dimensional (3D) printing in teaching musculoskeletal oncology for medical undergraduates

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月27日

查看全文
  • Qinxiang Shant Sin,
  • Hun Yi Koh,
  • Kumaran Rasappan

摘要

Introduction

The approach to integrating relevant anatomy in the medical curriculum has been debated for many years. Current literature has explored the broad impact of 3D printing in medical education. However, there is little evidence on 3D printing for the teaching of musculoskeletal oncology (MSO). This is a self-controlled case series (SCCS) study that aims to analyse the effectiveness of 3D printed models in MSO in enhancing the learning experience, engagement and understanding of clinical and surgical anatomy for medical students.

Method

A cross-sectional cohort study involving 75 clinical year medical students across 3 years from 2 medical schools that rotated through a single teaching hospital’s orthopaedic department. Participants first viewed a set of computed-tomography (CT) images of a large pelvic osteosarcoma from a free open-source database, the Cancer Genome Atlas Sarcoma Collection (TCGA-SARC). A standardised 10-minute pre-intervention questionnaire which comprised 15 questions categorised by: 4 questions in ‘anatomical knowledge’, 7 questions in ‘spatial awareness’, 4 questions in ‘surgical planning and complications’, was administered to assess the baseline knowledge in their interpretation of the pathology via CT images only. Next, a 3D-printed model of the pelvic osteosarcoma, which included colour-coded adjacent structures, was provided as an adjunct to answer the same questionnaire. This concluded with a 5-point Likert scale feedback survey to gauge their perspectives and experience.

Results

The mean scores comparing their pre- and post-intervention assessment questionnaire increased by +1.34 from 8.15 (SD = 1.85) to 9.49 (SD = 1.7) (p < 0.001). The final year students had the greatest improvement of +1.54 from 8.00 (SD = 1.89) to 9.54 (SD = 1.59) (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the scores amongst the 2 medical schools. 91% of students agreed that the 3D model had helped them further their understanding of the anatomy of the sarcoma and 87% would want 3D printing models to augment their learning in anatomy. Baseline weaker students demonstrated significantly greater improvement in scores compared with baseline stronger students (mean difference +2.04 vs +0.30, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

3D printing is an effective teaching adjunct for musculoskeletal oncology surgical anatomy for medical undergraduates and could be used to enhance their understanding and learning experience. 3D models could be integrated in the teaching curriculum of surgical anatomy for undergraduate students.