Reconsidering Early Anatomy Exposure: Performance, Identity, and Belonging in Specialty Choice
Rebecca L. Pratt
Professor of Anatomy, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, Michigan, USA
Undergraduate anatomy coursework is often discussed as a possible prerequisite for medical school acceptance or as a course elective for improving medical student performance in clinical anatomy material. Current evidence, including the 2024 publication Effect of anatomical studies prior to medical school on medical school anatomy study success and residency choice, suggests that early anatomy exposure does not reveal a measurable advantage in medical school anatomy performance or standardized examination outcomes1. The authors also proposed that early introduction to anatomy could possibly influence specialty choice, particularly in anatomy-driven fields such as surgery, orthopedics, and radiology. Anonymous survey results, instead, highlighted that students who applied to surgical specialties demonstrated higher performance in anatomical courses and higher USMLE Step 1 scores compared to those who did not apply to surgical specialties1.
Rather than viewing these conclusions as dismissive of pre-matriculation anatomy coursework, this commentary offers a broader interpretation. Drawing on medical education literature and long-standing observations from decades of anatomy teaching, early anatomy exposure may function less as a performance accelerator and more as a formative experience that shapes professional identity. Students often make career decisions not on objective metrics alone, but on how confident and capable they feel within a discipline. This is an internal narrative shaped through exposure, mentorship, and informal laboratory conversations with faculty2-4. By reframing the value of pre-medical anatomy coursework away from score optimization and toward identity formation we refresh the conversation about how anatomy education supports specialty exploration.
DOI: 10.29245/2767-5130/2026/1.1245 View / Download PdfA Six-Month Study on the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Intra-Articular Injection of Sodium Hyaluronate in Knee Osteoarthritis
Serhat Gafur Karaca1*, Burak Kaval2
1Orthopaedic Surgeon, Private Practice, Atasehir-Istanbul, Turkey
2Orthopaedic Surgeon, Isparta City Hospital, Isparta, Turkey
Objective: This single-center, open-label, phase IV study aimed to evaluate the six-month efficacy and safety of a single intra-articular injection of 2% sodium hyaluronate (Hyarelief®) in patients with grade III knee osteoarthritis (OA).
Material and Methods: Ninety patients aged ≥40 years with ACR-defined grade III knee OA received a single injection. Primary outcomes were pain intensity (10-cm Visual Analogue Scale, VAS) and joint function (WOMAC index), assessed at baseline and on days 15, 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180. A linear mixed model with Bonferroni correction analyzed changes over time. Subgroup analyses (Mann-Whitney U test) examined differences by gender, adverse events, and rescue medication use.
Results: A significant effect of time was found for both VAS (F=263.319, p<0.001) and WOMAC scores (F=1054.539, p<0.001). Mean VAS decreased from 6.33±1.01 cm at baseline to 1.06±0.90 cm at day 90 (p<0.001). Mean WOMAC improved from 0.733±0.099 to 0.309±0.066 at day 120 (p<0.001). All follow-up scores were significantly better than baseline (all p<0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed significantly higher average pain in males versus females (p=0.001) and in patients requiring rescue medication (p<0.001). Adverse events were rare (5.6%) and mild.
Conclusion: A single injection of 2% sodium hyaluronate provides statistically and clinically significant improvement in pain and function for up to six months in patients with grade III knee OA, with a favorable safety profile. The treatment effect appears robust, though pain reporting may vary by gender.
DOI: 10.29245/2767-5130/2026/1.1244 View / Download PdfCommentary: Prevalence of Three Prominent Corticosteroid Side Effects in a Large Asthma Population by Age, Sex and ICD-10 Asthma Severity with Recommendations for Screening1
DOI: 10.29245/2767-5130/2025/4.1243 View / Download PdfNicholas Orfan1*, Bowen Yao2
1Population Health Impact Institute, St. Augustine, Florida, USA
2University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
Cell-Based Management of Cartilage Defects: A Review
Saif S Aldhuhoori
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Zayed Military Hospital, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Cartilage injury can be disabling for young and active patients/athletes. These patients often do not regain normal function, and total joint replacement is not the best option for young patients. The current focus is on tissue engineering, scaffolds, and stem cells to form hyaline cartilage that is mechanically functional within cartilage defects. The success of stem cell treatment for animal cartilage defects in vivo is well established. Stem cells have been incorporated for cartilage defect treatment in humans for some time now. Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs) in cartilage repair have shown better outcomes than all available clinical options. Although some issues still need to be addressed, long-term comparative clinical studies of MSCs-based treatments are required before using this technique as the gold standard for cartilage defect treatment.
DOI: 10.29245/2767-5130/2025/4.1233 View / Download Pdf