Does 3D stereoscopy support anatomical education?
- PDF / 356,938 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 39 Downloads / 179 Views
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Does 3D stereoscopy support anatomical education? Dimitrios Chytas1 · Maria Piagkou2 · Konstantinos Natsis3 Received: 29 August 2020 / Accepted: 28 September 2020 © Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2020
It was our pleasure to read Bernard et al.’s [1] paper which investigated the value of stereoscopic three-dimensional (3D) digital models in anatomy education. Stereoscopic digital 3D images are composed of two digital images which are seen separately, each with a different eye [4]. In contrast, 3D digital images which can be rotated in three dimensions but are presented on a two-dimensional (2D) screen are called monoscopic images [4]. Bernard et al. [1] concluded that stereoscopic 3D models led to better students’ academic performance compared to 2D images and that stereoscopy supports anatomy education. We would like to note that, in our opinion, to draw this conclusion, there is a need for further comparison not only between stereoscopic models with 2D images but particularly with other types of 3D models. Specifically, the systematic review of Triepels et al. [5] has demonstrated that 3D digital visualization is a better anatomy education tool than 2D images. In Bernard et al. paper [1], it was also stated that, according to Triepels et al. [5], most students supported the use of 3D stereoscopic video. Although the systematic review [5] demonstrated that 3D digital visualization technologies are better anatomy education methods than 2D models, the article did not focus on stereoscopy and it was not concluded that stereoscopic 3D models are better than monoscopic ones. Other studies which, similar to Bernard et al. [1], focused on medical education, failed to prove that 3D stereoscopy supports anatomy teaching, in comparison with other 3D tools [2, 4]. More specifically, the randomized controlled trial of Bogomolova et al. [2] investigated 58 medical and biomedical students
(20 were taught anatomy via 3D stereoscopic augmented reality models, 20 via monoscopic 3D desktop models and 18 via a 2D atlas). After the educational intervention, the examination performance was insignificantly different between stereoscopic and monoscopic groups, as well as between stereoscopic and 2D groups. The paper of de Faria et al. [4] comprised 84 graduate medical students, divided into 3 groups: the first one received neuroanatomy teaching via conventional lectures and 2D images, the second via non-stereoscopic 3D models and the third via stereoscopic ones. The written theory test, as well as the laboratory practicum, did not demonstrate statistically significant difference between second and third group, although those two groups had a significantly better performance than the first one. There is a lack of studies comparing stereoscopic 3D digital visualization with cadavers’ dissection and prosection in anatomy education. Thus, we believe that the conclusion of Bernard et al.’s [1] paper according to which 3D stereoscopy supports anatomy education, could be more safely extracted if 3D s
Data Loading...
