Explorable three-dimensional digital model of the female pelvis, pelvic contents, and perineum for anatomical education

Anatomical Sciences Education

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 127-133

  Sergovich, Aimée ^a   Johnson, Marjorie ^a   Wilson, Timothy D ^a  

^a WESTERN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Anatomical reconstruction; Female pelvis; Gross anatomy; Medical education; Perineum; Reproductive organs; Stereoscopic models; Teaching tool; Three dimensional models; Virtual pelvis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; PELVIS; PERINEUM; TEACHING; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VISIBLE HUMAN PROJECT;

COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; MODELS, ANATOMIC; PELVIS; PERINEUM; VISIBLE HUMAN PROJECTS;

EID: 77953271222     PISSN: 19359772     EISSN: 19359780     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ase.135     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Ackerman MJ. 1998. The visible human project: A resource for anatomical visualization. Stud Health Technol Inform 52:1030-1032.
2. Bajka M, Manestar M, Hug J, Szekely G, Haller U, Groscurth P. 2004. Detailed anatomy of the abdomen and pelvis of the visible human female. Clin Anat 17:252-260.
3. Beyersdorff D, Schiemann T, Taupitz M, Kooijman H, Hamm B, Nicolas V. 2001. Sectional depiction of the pelvic.oor by CT, MR imaging and sheet plastination: Computer-aided correlation and 3D model.. Eur Radiol 11:659-664.
4. Blake JB. 1980. Anatomy. In: Numbers RL (Editor). The Education of American Physicians: Historical Essays. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. p 29-47.
5. Brenton H, Hernandez J, Bello F, Strutton P, Purkayastha S, Firth T, Darzi A. 2007. Using multimedia and Web3D to enhance anatomy teaching. Comput Educ 49:32-53.
6. Brooks JD, Chao WM, Kerr J. 1998. Male pelvic anatomy reconstructed from the visible human data set. J Urol 159:868-872.
7. Collins TJ, Given RL, Hulsebosch CE, Miller BT. 1994. Status of gross anatomy in the US and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century. Clin Anat 7:275-296.
8. Cottam WW. 1999. Adequacy of medical school gross anatomy education as perceived by certain postgraduate residency programs and anatomy course directors.. Clin Anat 12:55-56.
9. CRIPT. 2009. Corps for Research of Instructional and Perceptional Technology. London, Ontario, Canada: Centre for Research of Instructional and Perceptual Technologies. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry. URL: http://anatatorium.com/Publications/media/[accessed 28 December 2009].
10. Drake RL, Lowrie DJ, Prewitt CM. 2002. Survey of gross anatomy, microscopic anatomy, neuroscience, and embryology courses in medical school curricula in the United States.. Anat Rec 269:118-122.
11. Drake RL, McBride JM, Lachman N, Pawlina W. 2009. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: The winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ 2:253-259.
12. Garg A, Norman G, Spero L, Taylor I. 1999. Learning anatomy: Do new computer models improve spatial understanding? Med Teach 21:519-522.
13. Garg AX, Norman G, Sperotable L. 2001. How medical students learn spatial anatomy. Lancet 357:363-364.
14. Garg AX, Norman GR, Eva KW, Spero L, Sharan S. 2002. Is there any real virtue of virtual reality? The minor role of multiple orientations in learning anatomy from computers.. Acad Med 77: S97-S99.
15. Hariri S, Rawn C, Srivastava S, Youngblood P, Ladd A. 2004. Evaluation of a surgical simulator for learning clinical anatomy. Med Educ 38:896-902.
16. Hassinger JP, Dozois EJ, Holubar SD, Camp JC, Farley DR, Fidler JL, Pawlina W, Robb RA, Larson DW. 2010. Virtual pelvic anatomy simulator: A pilot study of usability and perceived effectiveness. J Surg Res in press. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2009. 06.016 [E-pub ahead of print].
17. Holubar SD, Hassinger JP, Dozois EJ, Camp JC, Farley DR, Fidler JL, Pawlina W, Robb RA. 2009. Virtual pelvic anatomy and surgery simulator: An innovative tool for teaching pelvic surgical anatomy.. Stud Health Technol Inform 142:122-124.
18. Jastrow H, Vollrath L. 2003. Teaching and learning gross anatomy using modern electronic media based on the Visible Human Project.. Clin Anat 16:44-54.
19. John NW. 2001. The impact of Web 3D technologies on medical education and training. Comput Educ 49:19-31.
20. Kakizawa Y, Hongo K, Rhoton AL. 2007. Construction of a three-dimensional interactive model of the skull base and cranial nerves. Neurosurgery 60:901-910.
21. Luursema J-M, Verwey WB, Kommers PAM, Geelkerken RH, Vos HJ. 2006. Optimizing conditions for computer-assisted anatomical learning. Interacting with Computers 18:1123-1138.
22. Miller R. 2000. Approaches to learning spatial relationships in gross anatomy: Perspective from wider principles of learning.. Clin Anat 13:469-443.
23. Nicholson DT, Chalk C, Funnell WR, Daniel SJ. 2006. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomized controlled study of a computergenerated three-dimensional anatomical ear model.. Med Educ 40:1081-1087.
24. Nguyen N, Wilson TD. 2009. A head in virtual reality: Development of a virtual head and neck model from Computed Tomography. Anat Sci Educ 2:294-301.
25. Parikh M, Rasmussen M, Brubaker L, Salomon C, Sakamoto K, Evenhouse R, Ai Z, Damaser MS. 2004. Three dimensional virtual model of the normal female pelvic.oor. Ann Biomed Eng 32:292-296.
26. Patel KM, Moxham BJ. 2008. The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by professional anatomists.. Clin Anat 21:182-189.
27. Pearl RK, Evenhouse R, Rasmussen M, Dech F, Silverstein JC, Prokasy S, Panko WB. 1999. The virtual pelvic.oor, a tele-immersive educational environment. Proc AMIA Symp 1999:345-348.
28. Poggio GF, Poggio T. 1984. The analysis of stereopsis. Annu Rev Neurosci 7:379-412.
29. Spitzer VM, Whitlock DG. 1998. The Visible Human dataset: The anatomical platform for human simulation. Anat Rec 253:49-57.
30. Yu JL, Huang ZH, Fu D. 2008. Reconstruction of a digital three-dimensional model of the rectum and the surrounding structures based on CT angiographic data.. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao 28:1466-1468.
31. Venuti JM, Imielinska C, Molholt P. 2004. New views of male pelvic anatomy: Role of computer generated 3D images. Clin Anat 17:261-271.
32. Vernon T, Peckham D. 2002. The bene.ts of 3D modeling and animation in medical teaching. J Audiov Media Med 25:142-148.