Exploring effectiveness in brain removal techniques: A comparison of approaches

Author:

Robertson Ellen M.1ORCID,Allison Sara M.2ORCID,Mueller Caroline M.3ORCID,Ferriby Andrew C.4ORCID,Roth Alex R.5,Batra Ranjan6

Affiliation:

1. Department of Physician Assistant Studies Randolph‐Macon College Ashland Virginia USA

2. Department of Biomedical Sciences Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine Kalamazoo Michigan USA

3. Department of Biomedical Sciences Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine Dublin Ohio USA

4. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology The George Washington University School of Medicine & Health Sciences Washington District of Columbia USA

5. Synaptive Medical Chicago Illinois USA

6. Department of Neurobiology and Anatomical Sciences University of Mississippi Medical Center Jackson Mississippi USA

Abstract

AbstractBrain dissection is typically an important part of teaching neuroscience in health professional programs. This results in the need to effectively remove brains, which is often performed in a gross anatomy laboratory in the same curriculum. The aim of this study was to determine the most effective method of brain removal based on the time required for removal, difficulty of removal, and preservation of key brain structures for educational purposes. Six different dissectors performed each of the three calvaria removal approaches and three different spinal cord transection methods rating them for difficulty and tracking the time required. The combination of calvaria and brainstem approaches and the order of completion was randomized to control for fatigue and previous individual experience. After all brains were removed, each was evaluated by neuroscience faculty for utility in education contexts. The study found little difference between the individual approaches for both calvaria removal and spinal cord transection in regards to quality of outcome. The use of a circumferential cut only proved to be the most time‐effective method for calvaria removal while a posterior cut between C1 and C2 was the most time‐effective and least difficult method for brainstem release. There was no one technique that proved to be most beneficial across all three measures. However, different approaches resulted in a different combination of benefits across the time, difficulty, and outcome ratings that should be considered in light of the individual needs of any program or researcher.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Embryology,General Medicine,Histology,Anatomy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3