Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Animal dissections are a common approach to teaching anatomy and physiology, but they are costly, pose safety risks, and raise ethical concerns. Alternatives like computer simulations and synthetic specimens have been explored, but they lack the realism of live dissections. Virtual reality (VR) technology provides a promising solution by immersing learners in a virtual environment that closely mimics real-life dissections and allows for skill development and feedback. VR also removes ethical and emotional concerns associated with dissections and enhances learning opportunities. To explore the effectiveness of VR in anatomy and physiology education, we conducted a detailed survey of 48 students in an undergraduate physiology laboratory course. The survey, administered before and after students performed both a VR frog dissection and an in-person frog dissection, was designed to gauge their perceptions, preferences, and learning experiences with both methods. Results indicate that while no participants considered VR a perfect substitute, a majority (80%) still viewed animal dissections as an essential part of science laboratory courses. Interestingly, 43% of participants expressed a stronger preference for live dissections post-experiment, citing greater excitement and perceived informativeness. In contrast, 25% favored VR or alternative methods, highlighting increased comfort and reduced discomfort. A recurring theme was VR's role as a preparatory or alternative tool for those hesitant towards live dissection. This study underscores VR's potential in addressing traditional dissection methods' limitations and emphasizes the need for further research into VR's effectiveness in anatomy and physiology education. We aim to foster dialogue on the use of alternative technologies in enhancing learning opportunities within laboratory and clinical sciences. This project was funded by the Department of Physiology at Michigan State University. This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2024 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.
Zubek et al. (Wed,) studied this question.