84 - Development of a Vertically Integrated Anatomy Curriculum in Medical Education

Poster Board Number: 84
There are separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – first hour
Even poster #s – second hour

Abstract Body : Introduction and Objective
Integration of anatomy and other basic sciences curricula is a growing trend in medical education. With increasing competition for instruction time, anatomists are integrating content to consolidate the students’ time and learning. However, the process of vertically integrating anatomy into an established curriculum is a complex long-term project requiring input, planning, and support from faculty and students. We have undertaken a project to implement horizontal and vertical integration of anatomy into our patient-based learning (PBL) curriculum at the University of Missouri School of Medicine to better prepare our students for clinical practice.

The purpose of this study is to analyze data collected from students and faculty to assess areas of demand and create a phased plan for the vertical integration of anatomy in a medical education curriculum.

Materials and Methods
We collected data on student and faculty perceptions of the current anatomy curriculum at the University of Missouri School of Medicine. We examined existing survey data between 2014-2022 from the biannual independent student analysis (ISA) of all medical students and from the annual American Association of Medical Colleges graduate questionnaire (AAMC GQ) of M4 students. We also developed and distributed anonymous Qualtrics surveys to M2-M4 medical students and to clerkship course directors.

Results
ISA data show that approximately 80% of students were satisfied with anatomy lectures and with the integration of anatomy into the PBL curriculum over the time period surveyed. However, AAMC GQ data showed that satisfaction with anatomy preparation for clerkships at the time of graduation varied between 56-76%. Our Qualtrics survey demonstrated that students and clerkship directors strongly supported additional anatomy learning opportunities after the M1 year, with support for specific activities varying widely.

Conclusions
While students at our institution were satisfied with anatomy during their preclinical years, they felt less prepared with anatomy in clinical practice. Data from our independent survey of students and clerkship directors supported this. Overall, our results suggest that identifying specific approaches for anatomy instruction within the clinical curriculum is the next step of our project.