3D printing as a pedagogical tool for teaching normal human anatomy: a systematic review

BMC Medical Education

Research

Eugénie Bertin¹  Aurélien Louvrier²  Laurent Tatu³  Eléonore Brumpt⁴ 

[1]University of Franche-Comté, 19 rue Ambroise Paré, 25000, Besançon, France

[2]Chirurgie Maxillo-Faciale, Stomatologie Et Odontologie Hospitalière, CHU de Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France

[3]University of Franche-Comté, 19 rue Ambroise Paré, 25000, Besançon, France

[4]Chirurgie Maxillo-Faciale, Stomatologie Et Odontologie Hospitalière, CHU de Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France

[5]Plateforme I3DM (Impression 3D Médicale), CHU Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France

[6]University of Franche-Comté, 19 rue Ambroise Paré, 25000, Besançon, France

[7]Neurologie, CHU de Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France

[8]Laboratoire de Neurosciences Intégratives Et Cliniques, University Franche-Comté, EA 481, F-25000, Besançon, France

[9]University of Franche-Comté, 19 rue Ambroise Paré, 25000, Besançon, France

[10]Radiologie, CHU de Besançon, 25000, Besançon, France

[11]Laboratoire Nano Médecine, Imagerie, Thérapeutique, EA 4662, University of Franche-Comté, 16 Route de Gray, F-25000, Besançon, France

[12]Anatomy Department, UFR Santé, 19 Rue Ambroise Paré, CS 71806, F25030, Besançon, France

关键词: Anatomy;    Learning;    Review;    Teaching;    3D printing;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-023-04744-w

 received in 2023-03-22, accepted in 2023-10-03,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThree-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.MethodsAn 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionThis 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.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

【 图 表 】

Fig. 2