Identification of Anatomy Contents for Medical Students Using DELPHI Technique

https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.32254

Siti Munawaroh(1*), Gandes Retno Rahayu(2), Efrayim Suryadi(3)

(1) Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta – INDONESIA
(2) Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Gadjak Mada, Yogyakarta – INDONESIA
(3) 
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Background: Anatomy is one of basic science in medicine. As doctors are obligated to assure their service is safe and efficient, they need to master anatomy science to support their work on comprehend the patient condition. In another condition, there is a shifting on medical curricula that impacted on decrease of anatomy instructional hours. This condition result in lower of anatomy academic achievement among medical students. The third of ten question Harden in curriculum development, that is what content should be included? need to be resolved so that the limited time available can be utilized as well as possible. This study aims to achieve national scope consensus among anatomical expert about anatomical material course that must be delivered to medical students.

Method: This study was design in qualitative approach with specified method of two round Delphi Technique. Using purposive sampling method, the subject of study involved was 20 experts of anatomical science in Indonesia. The questionnaire as instrument in this study arranged based on anatomy text book. The first Delphi purpose to select the anatomical course material and additional course material. The second Delphi round intent to provide level range from 1-4. The consensus level established by the researcher at 80% point.

Results: The first Delphi round result in 760 anatomy topics consist of 636 original material arranged by researcher and 124 additional material added by the Delphi panel. Additional materials are osteomyology and sesnsory system. The second Delphi round agree 64% material of first Delphi round (489).

Conclusion: Indonesian anatomical experts agree in which not all of anatomy material need to be learned by medical student. Their consensus is about 64% of all the material that must be learned.


Keywords


Anatomy, core syllabus, expert consensus, Delphi method

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Turney B. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2007; 89:104–7.
  2. McCuskey RS, Carmichael SWKDG. The Importance of Anatomy in Health Professions Education and the Shortage of Qualified Educators. Academic Medicine. 2005; 80(4): 349-51.
  3. Drake R, McBride J, Lachman A, Pawlina W. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: the winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ. 2009; 2: p. 253–259.
  4. The Education Committee of the Anatomical Society of Great Britain and Ireland. A core syllabus in anatomy for medical students - Adding common sense to need to know. Eur J Anat. 2007; 11: 3-18.
  5. Swamy M, Venkatachalam S, McLachlan J. A Delphi consensus study to identify current clinically most valuable orthopaedic anatomy components for teaching medical students. BMC Medical Education. 2014;14(230):1-5.
  6. Ganguly PK. Teaching and Learning of Anatomy in the 21st century: Direction and the strategy. The Open Medical education Journal. 2010; 3:5-10.
  7. Moxham BJ, Plaisant O, Smith CF, Pawlina W, McHanwell S. An Approach Toward the Development of Core Syllabuses for the Anatomical Sciences. Anatomical Sciences Education. 2014; 7:302–11.
  8. Klement BJ, Paulsen DF, Wineski LE. Anatomy as the Backbone of an Integrated First Year Medical Curriculum: Design and Implementation. Anat Sci Educ. 2011; 4(3):157–69.
  9. Bergman EM, Vleuten CPMVD, Scherpbier AJJA. Why don’t they know enough about anatomy? A narrative review. Medical Teacher. 2011; 33:403–9.
  10. Munawaroh S. PENGGUNAAN 4C/ID DAN ACTIVE LEARNING DALAM PEMBELAJARAN ANATOMI DALAM LARGE GROUP. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia. 2015 Maret; 4(1).
  11. Ball JJ, Napuli KLP, Zumpano M. An International Survey of Gross Anatomy Courses in Chiropractic Colleges. The Journal of Chiropractic Education. 2012; 26(2):175-83.
  12. Harden RM. Ten questions to ask when planning a course or curriculum. Medical Education. 1986; 20:356365.
  13. Linstone HA, Turoff M. The Delphi Method Techniques and Applications: Addison Wesley Educational Publisher Inc; 2002.
  14. Tubbs R, Sorenson E, Sharma A, Benninger B, Norton N, Loukas M, et al. The development of a core syllabus for the teaching of head and neck anatomy to medical students. Clin. Anat. J. 2014;27(3):321-30.
  15. Smith CF, Finn GM, Stewart J, McHanwell S. Anatomical Society core regional anatomy syllabus for undergraduate medicine: the Delphi process. Journal of Anatomy. 2016;228:2-14.
  16. Drake RL, Vogl W, Mitchell AWM. Gray's Anatomy for Student: Elsevier; 2007.
  17. Moore KL, Dalley AF, Agur AMR. Clinically Oriented Anatomy. 7th ed. London: Lippincott williams & wilkins Wolters Kluwer; 2014.
  18. Sobotta J. Sobotta, Atlas of Human anatomy. 15th ed. Paulsen F, Waschke J, editors. Munich: Elsevier; 2010.
  19. Keeney S, Hasson F, McKenna H. The Delphi Technique in Nursing and Health Research Malaysia: A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication; 2011.
  20. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2000; 32(4):1008-15.
  21. Carlson BM. Embryology in the Medical Curriculum. The Anatomical Record (New Anat). 2002;269:89 –98.
  22. Scott KM, Charles AR, Holland AJA. Clinical embryology teaching: is it relevant anymore? ANZ of Journal Surgery. 2013;83:709-12.
  23. KKI. Standar Kompetensi Dokter Indonesia (SKDI). 2nd ed. Indonesia: Konsil Kedokteran Indonesia; 2012.
  24. Louw G, Eizenberg N, Carmichael SW. The place of anatomy in medical education: AMEE Guide no 41. Medical Teacher. 2009;31:373–86.
  25. Sweller J. How the Human Cognitive System Deals with Complexity. In ELEN J, CLARK RE, editors. HANDLING COMPLEXITY IN LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS:THEORY AND RESEARCH. Netherlands: ELSEVIER; 2006. p. 13-26.
  26. Debue N, Leemput Cvd. What does germane load mean? An empirical contribution to the cognitive load theory. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014;5:1-12.
  27. Cho MJ, Hwang Yi. Students’ perception of anatomy education at a Korean medical college with respect to time and contents. Anatomy and Biology Cell. 2013;46:157-62.
  28. Hirt B, Shiozawa T. Clinical anatomy as a modern concept for 21st century teaching, postgraduate education, and research. Kitasato Med J. 2013; 43. 2013; 43:99-103.
  29. Meester LD. Learning Anatomy for Use Beyond the Classroom: A Guide for Medical. McMaster University Medical Journal. 2011; 8(1):45-8.
  30. Drake, Vogl and Mitchell. Gray’s Basic Anatomy. 1st ed. Singapore: Elsevier Churcill Livingstone; 2012.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.32254

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 2129 | views : 1809

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Siti Munawaroh, Gandes Retno Rahayu, Efrayim Suryadi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia (The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education) indexed by:

  
JPKI Stats