CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Avicenna J Med 2013; 03(04): 87-91
DOI: 10.4103/2231-0770.120499

Application of case discussions to improve anatomy learning in Syria

Mohammad Ayman Sabbagh
Department of Anatomy, Al Baath University, Hama, Syria
› Author Affiliations


Aims: Designing a new approach for learning gross anatomy to improve students′ motivation to study anatomy and to enable them to learn independently through case discussion. Materials and Methods: The study included newly registered students in the first academic year. The total number of students was 165, who were divided by alphabetical order into 15 groups of 11 students. Each group was led by one faculty member and each faculty member lead 3 groups. Each group met twice a week for 2 weeks to discuss one case related to the upper limb anatomy. Students took pre- and posttests and completed an opinion questionnaire about the case discussions. Results: The pretest score shows that 20% of the students received grades of 60% or above and that 80% received grades less than 60%. The posttest showed that 45% of the students received grades of 60% or above and that 55% received grades less than 60%. There was a significant difference between the pre- and posttest for grades <60% (P = 0.0000) and less significant for grades >60% (P = 0.0023). In addition, 17% of students achieved the same results (less than 60%) in both the pre- and posttests. The questionnaire revealed that all students stated that the discussion method was useful in their learning process, helped them to increase their motivation to study anatomy (85%), know the usefulness of studying anatomy (84%), and understand the problems (91%). Conclusions: The implementation of the case discussion in teaching anatomy can increase the students′ understanding and motivate them to learn.

Publication History

Article published online:
09 August 2021

© 2013. Syrian American Medical Society. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

  • References

  • 1 Brenton H, Hernandez J, Bello F, Strutton P, Purkayastha S, Firth T, et al. Using multimedia and Web3D to enhance anatomy teaching. Comput Educ 2007;49:32-53.
  • 2 Gabard DL, Lowe DL, Chang JW. Current and future instructional methods and influencing factors in anatomy instruction in physical therapy and medical schools in the U.S. J Allied Health 2012;41:53-62.
  • 3 Klement BJ, Paulsen DF, Wineski LE. Anatomy as the backbone of an integrated first year medical curriculum: Design and implementation. Anat Sci Educ 2011;4:157-69.
  • 4 Pallab KG, Lap KC. Living anatomy in the 21 st century: How far can we go? Southeast Asian J Med Educ 2008;2:52-7.
  • 5 Bergman EM, van der Vleuten CP, Scherpbier AJ. Why don′t they know enough about anatomy? Med Teach 2011;33:403-9.
  • 6 Peplow PV. Self-directed learning in anatomy: Incorporation of case-based studies into a conventional medical curriculum. Med Educ 1990;24:426-32.
  • 7 Pabst R. Gross anatomy: An outdated subject or an essential part of a modern medical curriculum? Results of a questionnaire circulated to final-year medical students. Anat Rec 1993;237:431-3.
  • 8 Moxham BJ, Shaw H, Crowson R, Plaisant O. The future of clinical anatomy. Eur J Anat 2011;15:29-46.
  • 9 Scott TM. A case-based anatomy course. Med Educ 1994;28:68-73.
  • 10 Percac S, Goodenough DA. Problem-based teaching and learning as a bridge from basic anatomy to clinical clerkships. Surg Radiol Anat 1998;20:203-7.
  • 11 Barrows HS, Tamblyn RM. Problem-based learning. An approach to Medical Education. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1980.
  • 12 Schmidt HG. The rationale behind problem-based learning. In: Schmidt HG, Lipkin M de Vries, Greep JM, editors. New Directions for Medical Education. Problem-Based Learning and Community-Oriented Medical Education. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1989.
  • 13 Moxham BJ, Moxham SA. The relationships between attitudes, course aims and teaching methods for the teaching of gross anatomy in the medical curriculum. Eur J Anat 2007;11:19-30.
  • 14 Pereira JA, Merí A, Molina-Ros A, Molina-Andreu O. Web-based course for teaching human anatomy The UPF experience. Eur J Anat 2003;7:19-22.
  • 15 Edgell H. Teaching anatomy with multiple techniques, teaching innovation projects 2011;1. 1, Article 3.
  • 16 Moore KL. Clinically oriented anatomy. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins; 1985.
  • 17 Haarden RM, Sowden S, Dunn WR. Some educational strategies in curriculum development: The SPICES model. Med Educ 1984;18:284-97.
  • 18 Haarden RM, Davis MH. The continuum of problem-based learning. Med Teach 1998;20:317-22.
  • 19 Bouhuijs PA, Schmidt HG, van Berkel. Problem based learning as an educational strategy. Malta: Network Publications; 1993.
  • 20 Kerby J, Shukur ZN, Shalhoub J. The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by medical students. Clin Anat 2011;24:489-97.