Kumar GS, Chakraborty S

Language: English
References: 37
Page: 61-71
PDF size: 615.41 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Body donation has emerged as the preferred source of human cadavers around the world for anatomical education as medical schools around the world are emphasizing on the ethical acquisition of human cadavers because a neo-model of anatomical education is evolving around the world. In some countries, there is a disinterested gift of a human body, for the benefit of medical education and society. In contrast, there are countries, like India, where cadaver donation programs have a lot of problems and medical schools continue to use unclaimed corpses for anatomical studies, raising ethical concerns.
Objective: The present study was undertaken to unearth the factors prevalent in the Indian society that adversely affects the health of body bequest programs in the country.
Method: A study was conducted based on a questionnaire that included a representative sample of first year medical students
Results: Although it was noted that 74.5% respondents were aware of the shortage of human bodies for teaching anatomy in Indian medical schools and 52% responded in favour of donating their bodies in the future, however, just 6.1% of their relatives had made the same decision.
Conclusions: The analysis of study observations helped to identify specific factors that adversely affect the outcome of organ donation programs in the country and the authors made some recommendations to improve the scenario. The religious perception of this reality, in a medical education scenario, should be considered.

REFERENCES

1. Anyanwu EG, Obikili EN. Dissecting the dissectors: Knowledge, attitude, and practice of body bequests by Nigerian anatomists. Anat Sci Educ. 2012; 5: 347-353.

2. Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ. 2007; 41: 15-22.

3. Arráez-Aybar LA, Castaño-Collado G, Casado-Morales MI. Dissection as a modulator of emotional attitudes and reactions of future health professionals. Med Educ. 2008; 42: 563-571.

4. Warner JH, Rizzolo LJ. Anatomical instruction and training for professionalism from the 19th to the 21st centuries. Clin Anat. 2006; 19: 403-414

5. Arráez-Aybar LA, Castaño-Collado G, Casado-Morales MI. Dissection from the Spanish anatomist’s perspective: Aims, attitudes, and related aspects. Anat Rec 2004; 281B: 15-20

6. Rizzolo LJ. Human dissection: An approach to interweaving the traditional and humanistic goals of medical education. Anat Rec B New Anat. 2002; 269: 242-248.

7. Crow SM, O’Donoghue D, Vannatta JB, Thompson BM. Meeting the family: Promoting humanism in gross anatomy. Teach Learn Med. 2012; 24: 49-54.

8. Halpern J. From detached concern to empathy: Humanizing medical practice. 1st Ed. 2001; New York: Oxford University Press. p.196.

9. Jones DG, Whitaker MI. Anatomy’s use of unclaimed bodies. Clin Anat. 2012; 25: 246-254.

10. Guru A, Kumar N. Body donation in India: myths versus facts. Rev Arg de Anat Clin.2016; 7: 122.

11. Rath G, Garg K. Inception of cadaver dissection and its relevance in present day scenario of medical education. J Indian Med Assoc. 2006; 104: 331-333.

12. Dar R, Dar SK, Kumar MV. Organ and Tissue donation in India: Towards eliminating confusions, optimizing resources and standing united. Sch J Appl Med Sci. 2016; 4: 2400-2404.

13. Ajita R, Singh I. Body donation and its relevance in anatomy learning- a review. J Anat Soc India. 2007; 56: 44-47.

14. Ballala K, Shetty A, Malpe SB. Knowledge, attitude, and practices regarding whole body donation among medical professionals in a hospital in India. Anat Sci Educ. 2011; 4: 142-150.

15. Rokade SA, Gaikawad AP. Body donation in India: Social awareness, willingness, and associated factors. Anat Sci Educ. 2012; 5: 83-89.

16. Elizondo-Omaña RE, Guzmán-López S, García-Rodríguez Mde L. Dissection as a teaching tool: past, present and future. Anat Rec B New Anat. 2005; 285: 11-15.

17. Bundi KP, Wamachi A, Ndede K, Mwamisi J, Ndege P. Perception of cadaver dissection and views on anatomy as a subject between two pioneer cohorts in a Kenyan medical school. Anat J Afr. 2014; 3: 318-323.

18. Ghosh SK. Cadaveric dissection as an educational tool for anatomical sciences in the 21st century. Anat Sci Educ. 2017;10: 286-299.

19. Saltarelli AJ, Roseth CJ, Saltarelli WA. Human cadavers Vs. multimedia simulation: A study of student learning in anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2014; 7: 331-339.

20. Ghosh SK. Human cadaveric dissection: a historical account from ancient Greece to the modern era. Anat Cell Biol. 2015; 48: 153-169.

21. Tubbs RS, Jones DG. Special issue on ethics in anatomy. Clin Anat.2016; 29: 1-128.

22. Kahn PA, Champney TH, Hildebrandt S. The incompatibility of the use of unclaimed bodies with ethical anatomical education in the United States. Anat Sci Educ. 2017; 10: 200-201.

23. Hildebrandt S. 2016. Thoughts on practical core elements of an ethical anatomical education. Clin Anat. 2016; 29: 37-45.

24. Pawlina, W, Drake RL. 2016. Moving towards a moral era in anatomical sciences education. Anat Sci Educ. 2016; 9: 407-410.

25. Ghosh SK. 2017. Paying respect to human cadavers: We owe this to the first teacher in anatomy. Ann Anat. 2017; 211: 129-134.

26. Wilkinson TM. 2014. Getting consent into perspective. Clin Anat. 2014; 27: 844-846.

27. Riederer BM. Body donations today and tomorrow: What is best practice and why? Clin Anat. 2016; 29, 11-18.

28. Copeman J. Godless people and dead bodies: Materiality and the morality of Atheist Materialism. Soc Anal. 2015; 59: 40-61.

29. Rokade SA, Bahetee BH. Body donation a review. Med J West Ind. 2013; 41: 36-41.

30. Boulware L, Ratner LE, Cooper LA, Laveist TA, Powe NR. Whole body donation for medical science : a populationbased study. Clin Anat. 2004; 17: 570-577.

31. Alashek WA, Ehtuish EF, Elhabashi A, Emberish W, Mishra A. Reasons for unwillingness of Libyans to donate organs after death. Libyan J Med. 2009; 4: 110-113.

32. Bolt S, Venbrux E, Eisinga R, Kuks J, Veening JG, Gerrits PO. Motivation for body donation to science: more than an altruistic act. Ann Anat. 2010; 192: 70-74.

33. Sehirli US, Saka E, Sarikaya O. Attitudes of Turkish anatomists toward cadaver donation. Clin Anat. 2004; 17: 677- 681.

34. O’Keeffe GS, Clarke-Pearson K, Council on Communications and Media. The impact of social media on children, adolescents, and families. Pediatrics. 2011; 127: 800-804.

35. Conesa C, Rios Zambudio A, Ramirez P, Canteras M, Rodriguez MM, Parrilla P. Influence of different sources of information on attitude toward organ donation: a factor analysis. Transplant Proc. 2004; 36: 1245-1248.

36. Arráez-Aybar LA, Bueno-López JL, Moxham BJ. 2014. Anatomists’ views on human body dissection and donation: An international survey. Ann Anat. 2014; 196: 376-386.

37. Zhang L, Xiao M, Gu M, Zhang Y, Jin J, Ding J. 2014. An overview of the roles and responsibilities of Chinese medical colleges in body donation programs. Anat Sci Educ. 2014; 7: 312-320.