Use of 3D-Printed and 2D-Illustrated International Frontal Sinus Anatomy Classification Anatomic Models for Resident Education

Low, Christopher M. MD
Morris, Jonathan M. MD
Matsumoto, Jane S. MD
Stokken, Janalee K. MD
O’Brien, Erin K. MD
Choby, Garret MD

¹Department of Otorhinolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
²Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
³Division of Pediatric Radiology, Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Garret Choby, MD, Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Email: [email protected]

Received February 18, 2019

Accepted June 11, 2019

Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery 161(4):p 705-713, October 2019. | DOI: 10.1177/0194599819860832

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.