Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Orthopedic sports medicine education is abstract and complex, which is difficult for students to master. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of 3D printing technology combined with a diverse CBL (Case-Based Learning) teaching model in orthopedic sports medicine education. From September 2023 to June 2024, we recruited 92 consecutive fourth-year clinical medicine students, with an average age of 21. 92 consecutive fourth-year clinical medicine students were randomized individually in a 1:1 ratio to a multimodal teaching group (3D printing technology combined with diversified CBL) or a traditional teaching group ( n = 46 per group). After the course, both groups completed an anonymous questionnaire survey, knowledge assessments, and related skills tests to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of the two methods from both subjective experiences and actual performance. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups (age and gender, p > 0.05). The multimodal teaching group showed significantly higher satisfaction rates across all surveyed domains compared to the control group ( p < 0.001). For the stage assessment, the multimodal teaching group achieved significantly higher scores in the primary outcome of operational skill (87.81 ± 5.36 vs. 66.32 ± 10.71; mean difference = 21.49, 95% CI: 17.82–25.16, p < 0.0001), as well as in theoretical knowledge (97.17 ± 1.20 vs. 83.07 ± 15.84; mean difference = 14.10, 95% CI: 9.53–18.67, p < 0.0001) and case analysis ability (93.07 ± 6.59 vs. 78.63 ± 6.89; mean difference = 14.44, 95% CI: 11.71–17.17, p < 0.0001). Compared to traditional methods, the multimodal teaching strategy integrating 3D printing, CBL, flipped-classroom, and simulation significantly improved objectively assessed outcomes, including theoretical knowledge, operative skills, and case analysis ability. Students also reported higher satisfaction and perceived improvements in self-learning, motivation, and clinical thinking. This combined approach may serve as an effective supplement to conventional orthopedic sports medicine education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: