*Correspondence to: Dr. Shalini Singh, Galgotias University, Uttar Pradesh, India
Received: Dec 02, 2025; Accepted: May 25, 2026; Published: Jun 05, 2026
Citation: Singh S, Singh M (2026) Effectiveness of Cadaveric Dissection Vs. Digital Learning Tools: A Systematic Review of Anatomy Education. J Anatomical Variation and Clinical Case Report 4:123.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61309/javccr.1000123
Copyright: ©2026 Singh S. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
ABSTRACT
Background: Anatomy forms the foundation of medical education. Traditionally, cadaveric dissection has been the centrepiece of anatomy instruction, providing students with irreplaceable tactile, spatial, and humanistic learning experiences. However, logistical constraints, ethical considerations, cadaver shortages, and the rapid advancement of digital technologies have prompted widespread exploration of alternative and supplementary approaches. Digital learning tools-including three-dimensional (3D) visualisation software, virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and virtual dissection tables-offer scalable, interactive pedagogical alternatives. The comparative effectiveness of these modalities remains actively debated. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA 2020 guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Databases searched included PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library (January 2000–March 2025). Eligible studies compared cadaveric dissection with digital learning tools among medical and health science students, reporting outcomes related to knowledge acquisition, spatial understanding, psychomotor skills, retention, or learner satisfaction. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers using a standardised form. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB-2) tool for randomised controlled trials and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Results: Of 1,264 studies identified, 37 met inclusion criteria after full-text review. Sample sizes ranged from 40 to 850 participants across North America, Europe, Asia, Australia, and the Middle East. Cadaveric dissection demonstrated superior performance in long-term retention (mean composite score 88%), spatial understanding (91%), psychomotor/tactile skill acquisition (95%), and professional identity formation (92%). Digital tools outperformed dissection in short-term knowledge acquisition (84% vs 72%) and learner satisfaction with accessibility (82% vs 74%). Hybrid approaches combining dissection with digital tools consistently outperformed either modality alone across all measured domains (mean composite score 87%). Conclusion: Cadaveric dissection remains indispensable for comprehensive anatomy learning, particularly for tactile competence, spatial reasoning, and professional identity. Digital tools provide significant complementary benefits, especially for visualisation, accessibility, and initial knowledge engagement. Evidence strongly supports a structured hybrid model integrating dissection with digital tools to maximise learning outcomes.
Keywords: Cadaveric dissection; Digital anatomy; Virtual reality; Augmented reality; Medical education; Systematic review; Hybrid learning; Anatomy curriculum
