Cargando…

Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education

Three-dimensional printing models (3DPs) have been widely used in medical anatomy training. However, the 3DPs evaluation results differ depending on such factors as the training objects, experimental design, organ parts, and test content. Thus, this systematic evaluation was carried out to better un...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ye, Zhen, Jiang, Hanming, Bai, Suyun, Wang, Tao, Yang, Duxiao, Hou, Haifeng, Zhang, Yuanying, Yi, Shuying
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9986435/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36890917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1117555
_version_ 1784901165290356736
author Ye, Zhen
Jiang, Hanming
Bai, Suyun
Wang, Tao
Yang, Duxiao
Hou, Haifeng
Zhang, Yuanying
Yi, Shuying
author_facet Ye, Zhen
Jiang, Hanming
Bai, Suyun
Wang, Tao
Yang, Duxiao
Hou, Haifeng
Zhang, Yuanying
Yi, Shuying
author_sort Ye, Zhen
collection PubMed
description Three-dimensional printing models (3DPs) have been widely used in medical anatomy training. However, the 3DPs evaluation results differ depending on such factors as the training objects, experimental design, organ parts, and test content. Thus, this systematic evaluation was carried out to better understand the role of 3DPs in different populations and different experimental designs. Controlled (CON) studies of 3DPs were retrieved from PubMed and Web of Science databases, where the participants were medical students or residents. The teaching content is the anatomical knowledge of human organs. One evaluation indicator is the mastery of anatomical knowledge after training, and the other is the satisfaction of participants with 3DPs. On the whole, the performance of the 3DPs group was higher than that of the CON group; however, there was no statistical difference in the resident subgroup, and there was no statistical difference for 3DPs vs. 3D visual imaging (3DI). In terms of satisfaction rate, the summary data showed that the difference between the 3DPs group (83.6%) vs. the CON group (69.6%) (binary variable) was not statistically significant, with p > 0.05. 3DPs has a positive effect on anatomy teaching, although there are no statistical differences in the performance tests of individual subgroups; participants generally had good evaluations and satisfaction with 3DPs. 3DPs still faces challenges in production cost, raw material source, authenticity, durability, etc. The future of 3D-printing-model-assisted anatomy teaching is worthy of expectation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9986435
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99864352023-03-07 Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education Ye, Zhen Jiang, Hanming Bai, Suyun Wang, Tao Yang, Duxiao Hou, Haifeng Zhang, Yuanying Yi, Shuying Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Three-dimensional printing models (3DPs) have been widely used in medical anatomy training. However, the 3DPs evaluation results differ depending on such factors as the training objects, experimental design, organ parts, and test content. Thus, this systematic evaluation was carried out to better understand the role of 3DPs in different populations and different experimental designs. Controlled (CON) studies of 3DPs were retrieved from PubMed and Web of Science databases, where the participants were medical students or residents. The teaching content is the anatomical knowledge of human organs. One evaluation indicator is the mastery of anatomical knowledge after training, and the other is the satisfaction of participants with 3DPs. On the whole, the performance of the 3DPs group was higher than that of the CON group; however, there was no statistical difference in the resident subgroup, and there was no statistical difference for 3DPs vs. 3D visual imaging (3DI). In terms of satisfaction rate, the summary data showed that the difference between the 3DPs group (83.6%) vs. the CON group (69.6%) (binary variable) was not statistically significant, with p > 0.05. 3DPs has a positive effect on anatomy teaching, although there are no statistical differences in the performance tests of individual subgroups; participants generally had good evaluations and satisfaction with 3DPs. 3DPs still faces challenges in production cost, raw material source, authenticity, durability, etc. The future of 3D-printing-model-assisted anatomy teaching is worthy of expectation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9986435/ /pubmed/36890917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1117555 Text en Copyright © 2023 Ye, Jiang, Bai, Wang, Yang, Hou, Zhang and Yi. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Ye, Zhen
Jiang, Hanming
Bai, Suyun
Wang, Tao
Yang, Duxiao
Hou, Haifeng
Zhang, Yuanying
Yi, Shuying
Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title_full Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title_fullStr Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title_full_unstemmed Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title_short Meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3D printed models in anatomy education
title_sort meta-analyzing the efficacy of 3d printed models in anatomy education
topic Bioengineering and Biotechnology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9986435/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36890917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1117555
work_keys_str_mv AT yezhen metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT jianghanming metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT baisuyun metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT wangtao metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT yangduxiao metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT houhaifeng metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT zhangyuanying metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation
AT yishuying metaanalyzingtheefficacyof3dprintedmodelsinanatomyeducation