# Evaluating Cadaveric Simulation Versus Traditional Instruction for Teaching Ultrasound-Guided Serratus Anterior Plane Blocks: Effects on Procedural Competency

## TL;DR

Using cadaver models to teach a specific ultrasound-guided medical procedure improves students' hands-on skills more than traditional lectures and videos.

## Contribution

Demonstrates that cadaveric training enhances procedural competency for SAPB beyond traditional methods.

## Key findings

- The cadaveric training group scored significantly higher in procedural steps like transducer positioning and needle insertion.
- Both groups improved similarly in written knowledge, but procedural performance was better in the cadaveric group.
- Hands-on cadaveric practice provides a key advantage in developing clinical procedural skills.

## Abstract

Background: Medical education often relies on lecture-based instruction and videos to teach procedural skills. However, cadaveric-based training offers a more hands-on approach that may enhance procedural competency. This study evaluates the efficacy of cadaveric model training in teaching medical students the serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) compared with traditional lecture- and video-based instruction.

Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the procedural competency of medical students trained using a traditional method (lecture + video) versus those receiving additional cadaveric model practice. We hypothesized that cadaveric training would lead to greater proficiency in performing the SAPB.

Methods: A randomized comparative study was conducted with 26 medical students assigned by computer-generated allocation to either a traditional instruction group (lecture + video; n = 13) or an intervention group (lecture + video + cadaveric training; n = 13). All participants completed a pre-study knowledge survey followed by standardized instruction. The intervention group additionally received hands-on cadaveric practice. Within one week, all students completed a 32-point procedural competency assessment and a post-study knowledge survey. Knowledge scores and procedural performance were compared between groups using independent samples t-tests.

Results: The intervention group demonstrated significantly higher procedural competency scores than the traditional instruction group, particularly in key steps such as transducer positioning, needle insertion, and injection site preparation. Both groups showed similar improvements in written knowledge (pre- vs. post-test), with no significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). In contrast, procedural performance scores were significantly higher in the cadaveric training group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Cadaveric model training significantly enhances procedural competency in medical students learning the SAPB compared with traditional lecture- and video-based instruction. While written knowledge gains were comparable, hands-on cadaveric experience provided a key advantage in developing clinical procedural skills. These findings support incorporating cadaveric-based instruction into procedural skill curricula for improved bedside preparedness.