PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 3, 2025BMC Medical Education9 citationsOpen Access

Dissection in the 21st century: virtual tables versus traditional methods and their influence on medical students’ perception – a systematic review

View Full Paper
TTTeodora TelecanRCRoxana-Denisa CapraşGFGabriela Adriana Filip

Key Points

  • Use of virtual dissection tables led to improved academic performance in 86% of studies analyzed.
  • Student satisfaction with these tools ranged from 64% to 95%, indicating strong engagement and enhanced spatial understanding.
  • Despite notable benefits, only 2.4% to 30.2% of students preferred exclusive virtual learning methods.
  • High implementation costs and limited tactile feedback were significant barriers to adopting virtual dissection tables in curricula.

Abstract

Virtual dissection tables (VDTs) have emerged as innovative tools in anatomy education, offering interactive, three-dimensional visualization of anatomical structures. However, their performance in conjunction with traditional teaching methods needs to be further analyzed and synthesized. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, student satisfaction and perceived utility of VDTs compared to cadaveric dissection, lectures, and textbook-based learning. A systematic search of literature identified 22 eligible studies involving students in medicine and related healthcare professions. Studies were analyzed in terms of design, cohort characteristics, educational outcomes, and anatomical content coverage. VDTs evaluated included commercial platforms such as Anatomage, Spectra, VH Dissector, and institutional in-house systems. VDT use was associated with improved academic performance in 86% of studies, with score increases ranging from 8 to 31% over traditional teaching methods. The greatest improvements were observed in musculoskeletal And neuroanatomy modules. Student satisfaction ranged from 64 to 95%, with the majority citing improved spatial understanding, engagement, And repeatability. However, preference for VDT-exclusive learning remained low, reported by only 2. 4–30. 2% of students. Most participants favored a hybrid approach combining VDTs with cadaver-based instruction. Despite these benefits, limitations included high implementation costs (up to 200, 000 USD), limited access due to device scarcity, lack of tactile feedback, and significant variation in assessment methods and anatomical content. Additionally, no study conducted a direct comparison between various VDT platforms, nor between commercial and in-house systems. VDTs represent a valuable complement to traditional anatomy education, enhancing learning outcomes and student engagement across a range of healthcare disciplines. However, their full potential is best realized when used as part of a multimodal curriculum that retains cadaveric dissection. Further research is needed to assess long-term outcomes, clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness, and to compare different VDT systems.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Telecan et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68e02f34f0e39f13e7fa20bdhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-07946-6
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper