Integrated pathology and radiology learning for a musculoskeletal system module: an example of interdisciplinary integrated form

Abstract

Introduction: Many curricula integrate radiology with anatomy courses but none of these curricula adopt integration of pathology with radiology as interdisciplinary form at the undergraduate level. The aim of the current study was to identify the outcome of interdisciplinary integrated course of pathology and radiology in musculoskeletal system module (MSK).

Methods: A comparative interventional study was conducted on 60 students representing a whole class of the third year of level V. MSK and gastrointestinal module (GIT) were selected as study and control module, respectively, as being adopted for the same level/allocated hours, enriched with many subject areas for both fields, and availability of learning resources for both. A planned interdisciplinary integrated course for MSK pathology and radiology was implemented in the pathology lab. The subject area was selected and taught for both fields in consecutive ways by pathology and radiology experts. After teaching, gross/histopathologic specimens and radiology imaging/reports were distributed over benches and the students investigated the same. Conversely, in GIT control module, both fields were delivered separately, and no interdisciplinary form of integration occurred. Students' scores for both fields were filtered from the objective structured practical exam, quiz, and final exam. Students' marks and satisfaction were subjected to multiple comparisons using independent student's t-test. SPSS version 17 was used.

Results: Significances were obtained between total marks of students for both modules and between radiology courses for both with P=0.0152 and 0.0199, respectively. Number of students who achieved >80% in MSK was 20 and 26 compared to 15 and 17 in GIT for pathology and radiology, respectively. Student satisfaction was high for interdisciplinary integration in MSK with significant difference obtained between MSK and GIT.

Conclusion: The integration of both fields augments student performance for both. This experience must encourage curriculum committee to globalize it over all other modules.

Keywords: Harden’ interdisciplinary level; curriculum reform; high level of integration; pathology teaching; radiology teaching.

Figure 1

Results of student marks in both MSK and GIT modules. Notes: The global comparison between all mark scales for both MSK and that of GIT modules gave significant results with P=0.0152, while differential analysis among mark scales in between both courses as marked by P does not give rise to any statistical differences among those scales. Abbreviations: GIT, gastrointestinal module; MSK, musculoskeletal system module.

Figure 2

Results of student marks in pathology for both MSK and GIT modules. Notes: Regarding the pathology mark scales, the comparison between both modules does not give significant results. Also, differential analysis among mark scales of pathology between both courses as marked by P does not give rise to any statistical differences among those scales. Abbreviations: GIT, gastrointestinal module; MSK, musculoskeletal system module.

Figure 3

Results of student marks in radiology for both MSK and GIT modules. Notes: Regarding the radiology mark scales, the comparison between both modules gives a significant result, P=0.0199; on the other hand, differential analysis among mark scales of radiology between both courses as marked by P does not give rise to any statistical differences among those scales. Abbreviations: GIT, gastrointestinal module; MSK, musculoskeletal system module.

Figure 4

Results of students’ satisfaction for the two modules. Notes: A global comparison between the satisfaction scales for both modules gives a highly significant difference with P=0.007, but on the other hand, differential analysis among satisfaction scales in between both courses as marked by P does not give rise to any statistical differences among those scales.