Cargando…
3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional-printed anatomical models (3DPAMs) appear to be a relevant tool due to their educational value and their feasibility. The objectives of this review were to describe and analyse the methods utilised for creating 3DPAMs used in teaching human anatomy and for evaluating it...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10589929/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37864193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w |
_version_ | 1785123889223827456 |
---|---|
author | Brumpt, Eléonore Bertin, Eugénie Tatu, Laurent Louvrier, Aurélien |
author_facet | Brumpt, Eléonore Bertin, Eugénie Tatu, Laurent Louvrier, Aurélien |
author_sort | Brumpt, Eléonore |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional-printed anatomical models (3DPAMs) appear to be a relevant tool due to their educational value and their feasibility. The objectives of this review were to describe and analyse the methods utilised for creating 3DPAMs used in teaching human anatomy and for evaluating its pedagogical contribution. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted on PubMed using the following terms: education, school, learning, teaching, learn, teach, educational, three-dimensional, 3D, 3-dimensional, printing, printed, print, anatomy, anatomical, anatomically, and anatomic. Data retrieved included study characteristics, model design, morphological evaluation, educational performance, advantages, and disadvantages. RESULTS: Of the 68 articles selected, the cephalic region was the most studied (33 articles); 51 articles mentioned bone printing. In 47 articles, the 3DPAM was designed from CT scans. Five printing processes were listed. Plastic and its derivatives were used in 48 studies. The cost per design ranged from 1.25 USD to 2800 USD. Thirty-seven studies compared 3DPAM to a reference model. Thirty-three articles investigated educational performance. The main advantages were visual and haptic qualities, effectiveness for teaching, reproducibility, customizability and manipulability, time savings, integration of functional anatomy, better mental rotation ability, knowledge retention, and educator/student satisfaction. The main disadvantages were related to the design: consistency, lack of detail or transparency, overly bright colours, long printing time, and high cost. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that 3DPAMs are feasible at a low cost and effective for teaching anatomy. More realistic models require access to more expensive 3D printing technologies and substantially longer design time, which would greatly increase the overall cost. Choosing an appropriate image acquisition modality is key. From a pedagogical viewpoint, 3DPAMs are effective tools for teaching anatomy, positively impacting the learning outcomes and satisfaction level. The pedagogical effectiveness of 3DPAMs seems to be best when they reproduce complex anatomical areas, and they are used by students early in their medical studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10589929 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105899292023-10-22 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review Brumpt, Eléonore Bertin, Eugénie Tatu, Laurent Louvrier, Aurélien BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: Three-dimensional-printed anatomical models (3DPAMs) appear to be a relevant tool due to their educational value and their feasibility. The objectives of this review were to describe and analyse the methods utilised for creating 3DPAMs used in teaching human anatomy and for evaluating its pedagogical contribution. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted on PubMed using the following terms: education, school, learning, teaching, learn, teach, educational, three-dimensional, 3D, 3-dimensional, printing, printed, print, anatomy, anatomical, anatomically, and anatomic. Data retrieved included study characteristics, model design, morphological evaluation, educational performance, advantages, and disadvantages. RESULTS: Of the 68 articles selected, the cephalic region was the most studied (33 articles); 51 articles mentioned bone printing. In 47 articles, the 3DPAM was designed from CT scans. Five printing processes were listed. Plastic and its derivatives were used in 48 studies. The cost per design ranged from 1.25 USD to 2800 USD. Thirty-seven studies compared 3DPAM to a reference model. Thirty-three articles investigated educational performance. The main advantages were visual and haptic qualities, effectiveness for teaching, reproducibility, customizability and manipulability, time savings, integration of functional anatomy, better mental rotation ability, knowledge retention, and educator/student satisfaction. The main disadvantages were related to the design: consistency, lack of detail or transparency, overly bright colours, long printing time, and high cost. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that 3DPAMs are feasible at a low cost and effective for teaching anatomy. More realistic models require access to more expensive 3D printing technologies and substantially longer design time, which would greatly increase the overall cost. Choosing an appropriate image acquisition modality is key. From a pedagogical viewpoint, 3DPAMs are effective tools for teaching anatomy, positively impacting the learning outcomes and satisfaction level. The pedagogical effectiveness of 3DPAMs seems to be best when they reproduce complex anatomical areas, and they are used by students early in their medical studies. BioMed Central 2023-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC10589929/ /pubmed/37864193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Brumpt, Eléonore Bertin, Eugénie Tatu, Laurent Louvrier, Aurélien 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title | 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title_full | 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title_short | 3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
title_sort | 3d printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10589929/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37864193 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT brumpteleonore 3dprintingasapedagogicaltoolforteachingnormalhumananatomyasystematicreview AT bertineugenie 3dprintingasapedagogicaltoolforteachingnormalhumananatomyasystematicreview AT tatulaurent 3dprintingasapedagogicaltoolforteachingnormalhumananatomyasystematicreview AT louvrieraurelien 3dprintingasapedagogicaltoolforteachingnormalhumananatomyasystematicreview |