156 - Do student perceptions matter? Comparing feedback on a 3D printed model, computer model, and 2D wire diagram for learning cranial nerve anatomy

Poster Board Number: 156
There are separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – first hour
Even poster #s – second hour

Co-authors:

Randy Kulesza - Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine

Abstract Body :Cranial nerve anatomy is a high-yield topic in preclinical education due to its importance in interpreting patient signs and symptoms. Understanding the branching pattern and function of axon modalities is particularly helpful for localizing lesions. Phase 1 of this study developed computer and 3D printed models demonstrating the path of functional axon types of the facial nerve. Quantitative analysis showed that, for both models, learning was comparable to a traditional 2D wire diagram. Qualitative data may offer additional insight as to which learning tool is most usable for students. The objective of the current study was to assess student perceptions of the three learning tools. The authors hypothesized that both the computer and 3D printed models would be perceived more positively by students compared with a traditional 2D wire diagram. Two surveys were administered during the study. In the first survey, year 1 medical (MS1) students provided feedback on general perceptions and usability of their assigned resource following a learning session on facial nerve anatomy. The second survey was offered to all MS1 students after completion of the gross anatomy course. This survey allowed students to provide feedback on both the 3D printed and computer models relative to their course experience using the wire diagram. Likert-scale items were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis analysis. Results of both surveys demonstrate a preference for the 3D printed model over the computer model (p< .0001) and wire diagram (p< .0001). Specifically, the printed model was rated as more engaging, well-designed, interesting, and recommended compared with the wire diagram, and easier to use than the computer model (p< .0037). The 3D printed model was also rated as more applicable to meet the need for facial nerve learning tools compared with the computer model (p< .0001) and the wire diagram (p< .0015). When compared side-by-side in the post-course survey, the 3D printed model was preferred in 7 of 8 categories (p< .0001). Overall, while students expressed appreciation for all three learning tools, the 3D printed model was strongly preferred for learning facial nerve anatomy. This study highlights the importance of student feedback in making evidence-based recommendations for preclinical learning tools. Prior quantitative analysis was not effective in distinguishing between the learning tools. However, qualitative analysis provides insight that can aid educators in selecting a learning tool that is not only effective, but also desired by students.