Impact of Simulation-based Education on Learning Outcome and Technology Acceptance in Postgraduate Anatomy Students

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Anatomy and Cellular Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3 Legal Medicine Research Center, Legal Medicine Organization, Tehran, Iran

10.22038/fmej.2025.89729.1669

Abstract

Background: Simulation-based education is an effective method for developing students practical skills. Considering the importance of the anatomy course and the growing need for modern teaching approaches, the aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of simulation-based education on learning outcomes and technology acceptance of  Master of Science students in the field of anatomy.
Method: This study was based on an interventional design. Twenty Master of Science students in the field of anatomy were divided into two groups: a control group  (taught with  traditional lectures)  and an experimental group (taught with fixed cadaver simulator software). Learning was assessed based on students’ academic scores and technology acceptance  was assessed using Chen's Technology Acceptance Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26, software employing the independent t-test and Pearson’s  correlation coefficient.
Results: There were significant differences between the experimental and the control groups in learning outcomes  (p = 0.01) and technology acceptance (p = 0.01). Analysis of  statistics revealed  significant differences in the subscales of perceived ease of use (p = 0.03) and perceived insecurity  (p = 0.02) between the two groups. Additionally, there was a significant correlation between learning score and age  (p = 0.003) as well as gender  (p = 0.001).
Conclusion: Compared to traditional lecture-based  method, simulation-based education significantly enhanced learning and increased technology acceptance  among  Master of Science students in  anatomical sciences. Furthermore, individual factors such as age and gender were associated with learning performance. These findings suggest that simulation-based methods can serve as effective tools in teaching practical and complex subjects such as anatomy.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Kovacs G, Levitan R, Sandeski R. Clinical Cadavers as a Simulation Resource for Procedural Learning. AEM Educ Train. 2018 Jun 6;2(3):239-47.
  2. James HK, Pattison GTR, Griffin DR, Fisher JD. How Does Cadaveric Simulation Influence Learning in Orthopedic Residents? J Surg Educ. 2020 May-Jun;77(3):671-82.
  3. Hazan E, Torbeck R, Connolly D, Wang JV, Griffin T, Keller M, et al. Cadaveric simulation for improving surgical training in dermatology. Dermatol Online J. 2018 Jun 15;24(6):13030/qt5cq2n3vp.
  4. Wainman B, Aggarwal A, Birk SK, Gill JS, Hass KS, Fenesi B. Virtual Dissection: An Interactive Anatomy Learning Tool. Anat Sci Educ. 2021 Nov;14(6):788-98.
  5. Hau J, Sarubbo S, Perchey G, Crivello F, Zago L, Mellet E, et al. Cortical Terminations of the Inferior Fronto-Occipital and Uncinate Fasciculi: Anatomical Stem-Based Virtual Dissection. Front Neuroanat. 2016 May 24;10:58.
  6. Spiriev T, Mitev A, Stoykov V, Dimitrov N, Maslarski I, Nakov V. Three-Dimensional Immersive Photorealistic Layered Dissection of Superficial and Deep Back Muscles: Anatomical Study. Cureus. 2022 Jul 11;14(7):e26727.
  7. Tretter JT, Gupta SK, Izawa Y, Nishii T, Mori S. Virtual Dissection: Emerging as the Gold Standard of Analyzing Living Heart Anatomy. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2020 Aug 12;7(3):30.
  8. Darras KE, Spouge R, Hatala R, Nicolaou S, Hu J, Worthington A, et al. Integrated virtual and cadaveric dissection laboratories enhance first year medical students' anatomy experience: a pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2019 Oct 7;19(1):366.
  9. Swain NK, Anderson JA, Korrapati RB. Role of simulation software in enhancing student learning in computer organization and microcontroller courses. Proceedings of the 2008 IAJC-IGME International Conference. 2008:10.
  10. Wolffe GS, Yurcik W, Osborne H, Holliday MA. Teaching computer Organization/ Architecture with limited resources using simulators. SIGCSE '02 The 33rd Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education Covington, KY, USA —February 26-March 02, 2002, 176-80.
  11. Rafael Boscolo‑Berto· Cinzia Tortorella· Andrea Porzionato· Carla Stecco· Edgardo Enrico Edoardo Picardi · Veronica Macchi · Raffaele De Caro. The additional role of virtual to traditional dissection in teaching anatomy: a randomised controlled trial. Surg Radiol Anat. 2021; 43:469–79.

    12. Noori  S. The effect of technology acceptance on the continuous tendency to use electronic queuing system due to the mediating role of communication quality (Case study:       Customers of travel agencies in Rasht), Master Thesis in Business Management, Islamic Azad University, Rasht Branch.2014; 25-60.

  1. Chen Shih-Chih, Jong Din, Lai Min-Tsai. Assessing the Relationship between Technology Readiness and Continuance Intention in an E-Appointment System: Relationship Quality as a Mediator, J Med Syst, 2014; 38: 1-12.
  2. Yakura T, Hatayama N, Kawahara C, Ohmichi Y, Ohmichi M, Ban N, et al. The effect of simulation-based education before a cadaver dissection course. Anat Sci Educ. 2022 Mar;15(2):392-402.
  3. Patterson DA. Impact of a multimedia laboratory manual: Investigating the influence of student learning styles on laboratory preparation and performance over one semester. Education for chemical engineers, 2011; 6(1), e10-e30.
  4. Adnan S, Xiao J. A scoping review on the trends of digital anatomy education. Clin Anat. 2023 Apr;36(3):471-91.
  5. Torres K, Torres A, Pietrzyk L, Lisiecka J, Błoński M, Bącik-Donica M, et al. Simulation techniques in the anatomy curriculum: review of literature. Folia Morphol (Warsz). 2014 Feb;73(1):1-6.
  6. Kirkman MA, Ahmed M, Albert AF, Wilson MH, Nandi D, Sevdalis N. The use of simulation in neurosurgical education and training. A systematic review. J Neurosurg. 2014 Aug;121(2):228-46.
  7. Darras KE, Spouge R, Hatala R, Nicolaou S, Hu J, Worthington A. Integrated virtual and cadaveric dissection laboratories enhance first year medical students' anatomy experience: a pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2019 Oct 7;19(1):366.
  8. Bush EJ, Jones E, Dietz R, Kotlarek KJ. Students' Perception of a Virtual Dissection Laboratory in Undergraduate Anatomy and Physiology of Speech and Hearing: A Focus Group Study. Semin Speech Lang. 2023 Nov;44(5):287-302.
  9. Funjan K, Ashour L, Salameh M, Mustafa A, Seed Ahmed M. Perceptions and Attitudes of Jordanian Medical Students on Using 3D Interactive Anatomy Dissection in Teaching and Learning Anatomy. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2023 Aug 3;14:837-44.
  10. Karbasi Z, Niakan Kalhori SR. Application and evaluation of virtual technologies for anatomy education to medical students: A review. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2020 Dec 3;34:163.
  11. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ. 2010 Mar-Apr;3(2):83-93.
Future of Medical Education Journal
Volume 15, Issue 4
November 2025
Pages 41-45

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics