(474.36) The Dissection Experience of Orthopedic Resident: A Comparison between Soft-Preservation and Formalin-Fixation Embalming Techniques

Poster Board Number: C36
Introduction: AAA has separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – 10:15 am – 11:15 am
Even poster #s – 11:15 am – 12:15 pm

Jazmin Arce (The Ohio State University), Erik Contreras (The Ohio State University), Parth Vaghani (The Ohio State University), Kanu Goyal (The Ohio State University), Joy Balta (The Ohio State University)

Objective:  In a recent study, it was found that residents will feel more confidence, independence and fluency in the operational procedures presented to them throughout their career if introduced to the learning first on a human donor (James et al., 2020). This study is a comparison of alcohol preserved to standard formalin preserved through regional-based donor dissection completed by orthopedic residents. The results from this study will help informorthopedic residenciestoconsiderdifferent preservation techniques of human donors in teaching their future students through dissection for better learning outcomes.

Methods: Orthopedic Residents filled out a dissection survey after they had dissected for each week over a course of six weeks. Residents were expected to perform at least one dissection on a formalin-based donor and one on an alcohol persevered donor for accurate comparison in data collection.The survey used alikertscale format ranging from 1to5. The survey questions range from bone, tendon, muscle, ligament, nerve, vessel quality; ease of dissection; similarity to in vivo tissue, ease of finding specific structures, etc.Descriptive statistics were used to describe the differences in resident opinion/experience between the two types of donors.

Results: A total of 24 residentsparticipatedin the dissector survey over the six weeks. Residents compared ease of dissection, ease of identification, odor of chemical, skills acquired, joint range of motion, tissue elasticity, donor comparability to live patients, time spent and overall learning preferences. 88.3% of residents in the dissections statedthatoverallthey favored dissecting from alcohol preserved donors. When residents were asked to evaluate the differences in the donor preservations, residents favoredalcoholpreservation as a better way to stimulate their learning to in vivo tissue.

Conclusions/Implications: Orthopedic Residentsultimately agreethat the alcohol preserved donors are more effective when it comes toidentifyingthe human body framework through dissection. The results suggest that orthopedic residency programs should take into consideration the preservation techniques when teaching their students anatomy from human donors.