D L Myers1, L A Arya, A Verma, D L Polseno, E M Buchanan. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. dmyers@wihri.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether clay modeling with lecture is more effective than lecture alone in teaching female pelvic anatomy. METHODS: A pretest preceded a lecture on female pelvic anatomy in the following five groups of obstetrics and gynecology residents: postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) residents at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island (RI), PGY-1 residents at University of Connecticut (CT), and PGY-2, -3, and -4 residents at RI. The study group (PGY-1 RI) also participated in a clay modeling session. Both groups of PGY-1 residents were tested immediately (posttest 1) and then 8 weeks later (posttest 2). The PGY-2, -3, and -4 residents had only posttest 2. Data were analyzed with parametric, nonparametric, and repeated measures analyses. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the mean pretest scores of the five groups. The study group showed significant improvement in mean scores at posttest 1 (29.7 +/- 0.9, P <.001) and at posttest 2 (24.1 +/- 4.6, P =.03) compared with the mean pretest score (17.4 +/- 3.7). The CT residents demonstrated significant improvement in mean scores at posttest 1 (25.2 +/- 4.4, P =.02) but not at posttest 2 (19 +/- 3.7, P =.2) compared with their mean pretest score (15.2 +/- 2.9). There was no significant improvement in the mean scores at posttest 2 for PGY-2, -3, and -4 resident groups compared with their pretest scores. CONCLUSION: Clay modeling with lecture was more effective than lecture alone for teaching pelvic anatomy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether clay modeling with lecture is more effective than lecture alone in teaching female pelvic anatomy. METHODS: A pretest preceded a lecture on female pelvic anatomy in the following five groups of obstetrics and gynecology residents: postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) residents at Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island (RI), PGY-1 residents at University of Connecticut (CT), and PGY-2, -3, and -4 residents at RI. The study group (PGY-1 RI) also participated in a clay modeling session. Both groups of PGY-1 residents were tested immediately (posttest 1) and then 8 weeks later (posttest 2). The PGY-2, -3, and -4 residents had only posttest 2. Data were analyzed with parametric, nonparametric, and repeated measures analyses. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the mean pretest scores of the five groups. The study group showed significant improvement in mean scores at posttest 1 (29.7 +/- 0.9, P <.001) and at posttest 2 (24.1 +/- 4.6, P =.03) compared with the mean pretest score (17.4 +/- 3.7). The CT residents demonstrated significant improvement in mean scores at posttest 1 (25.2 +/- 4.4, P =.02) but not at posttest 2 (19 +/- 3.7, P =.2) compared with their mean pretest score (15.2 +/- 2.9). There was no significant improvement in the mean scores at posttest 2 for PGY-2, -3, and -4 resident groups compared with their pretest scores. CONCLUSION: Clay modeling with lecture was more effective than lecture alone for teaching pelvic anatomy.