Abstract
Objective
To examine the impact of 2-dimensional (2D) illustrations and 3-dimensonal (3D)–printed anatomic models of the frontal sinuses according to the International Frontal Sinus Anatomy Classification in the education of otolaryngology and radiology residents.
Study Design
A crossover study design with half of the study participants randomized to the 2D illustration intervention first and the other half randomized to the 3D-printed model first.
Setting
Regularly scheduled resident didactic lectures at a tertiary care center.
Subjects and Methods
Forty-one otolaryngology and radiology residents were assessed with pre- and postintervention questionnaires that included subjective and objective methods of assessment.
Results
Overall, there was a statistically significant improvement in total number of answers correct and in confidence score between the pre- and postintervention assessments (P < .0001). The primary outcome of order of intervention (ie, 2D → 3D vs 3D → 2D) did not result in statistically significant differences in postevaluation scores. In regard to the secondary outcome of learner preference for educational modality, radiology residents favored the 2D illustrations to understand anatomic relationships, while otolaryngology residents preferred the 3D model to be more helpful in surgical planning (P = .0075).
Conclusion
There is no difference between 2D-illustrated and 3D-printed International Frontal Sinus Anatomy Classification anatomic models in overall educational outcome, despite the preference of learners. Together, these models can be used as helpful tools in frontal sinus education for otolaryngology and radiology trainees.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.