Oral Presentation Format
Each talk is scheduled for 10 minutes with 5 minutes of questions following the talk. Oral presentations will occur on Monday, Tuesday and session 1 on Wednesday morning (presentations of joint relevance to ANZACA & ASHB). Presenters will be notified of their presentation session when they are notified of abstract acceptance.
Poster Presentation Format
Posters will be on display during Monday the 3rd and Tuesday the 4th of December.
The poster boards can accommodate posters of AO size. Posters MUST BE printed in portrait with a maximum width 84 cm x maximum height 119 cm.
The names of all author(s) and institution(s) must be displayed below the title.
Posters need to address the following subheadings:
Materials and Methods
Velcro mounts will be provided for attaching to poster boards.
Posters must be mounted before 10.30 am on Monday 3rd Dec and removed by 5.00 pm Tuesday 6th Dec 2018.
If relevant, delegates are advised to check that the content of their presentation meets the conditions of their institutional body donor program (where relevant).
Please be aware that if you have sensitive material in your presentation, this is a public presentation and may be recorded by participant unless you make it explicit that you DO NOT wish this to occur.
You will be allocated up to 2 minutes to deliver an oral presentation during the poster viewing sessions at the morning tea, lunch and afternoon tea - your allocated time will be published in the final program.
The ANZACA conference organising committee welcomes abstracts in the following categories, for consideration by review
- Clinical anatomy research
- Innovation in anatomy education
In order to allow a broad range of presentations from a number of presenters, authors will be limited to delivering one Oral Presentation as the presenting author.
Abstract Deadline - Extended!
Midnight (Eastern Australian Standard Time) Monday 1st October, 2018
Strictly only those abstracts submitted by the deadline will be considered!
Abstract Requirements and Structure
- Maximum of 250 word limit (including subheadings)
- No references required
- Appropriate ethics approval for any research must be in place – authors will be required to confirm this, by checking the appropriate box on the online submission platform when submitting their abstract.
Each abstract should be formatted as follows:
- Title: no longer than 20 words, written in sentence case (i.e. with a single capital at the beginning of the title)
- Author(s): Authors should be presented as initials (separated by a full-stop and a space) followed by surname. If more than one author, the number of the presenting author should be indicated using the drop-down menu. In the conference program, authors will be listed according to the order entered in this online abstract submission and the presenting author’s name will be underlined.
- Affiliation(s): Include the institution, city and country
- Body of abstract to be written as a series of paragraphs, with each subheading starting on a new line. All headings must be included and addressed:
- Materials and Methods
- Maximum 250 word limit (including subheadings).
Submissions will be evaluated based on the following:
- Originality and significance to clinical anatomy research and/or educational practice
- Clarity of abstract and adherence with submission requirements
- Scientific rigour/rationale of study
- Note that all relevant data should be included in the abstract. Abstracts that do not present results (e.g. state “results will be discussed” or similar) will not be considered for review
Notification regarding acceptance or rejection of abstracts will be sent by email to the submitting author by 15th October, 2018
Clinical anatomy research abstract
A. Zacharias,1 T. Pizzari,1 D. English,2 T. Kapakoulakis3 and R. Green1
1 La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia, 2 Fusion Physiotherapy, Victoria, Australia, 3 Bendigo Health Care Group, Victoria, Australia.
Hip abductor muscle volume in hip osteoarthritis and matched controls.
Introduction: Hip abductor muscle strength and function is negatively impacted by the presence of hip osteoarthritis (OA). This study quantified differences in hip abductor muscle volume, levels of fatty infiltration, and strength in a population with unilateral hip OA (n=20) when compared to a control group (n=20). The impact of OA severity on these variables was also examined.
Materials and Methods: Volume of the gluteus maximus (GMax), medius (GMed) and minimus (GMin) and tensor fascia lata (TFL) was measured using magnetic resonance imaging and muscle asymmetry calculated between affected and unaffected limbs. Fatty infiltrate within muscles was graded using the Goutallier classification system. Hip abduction and rotation strength was tested using a hand held dynamometer. Differences between groups or between limbs were analysed using t-tests and differences in fatty infiltration using non-parametric tests.
Results: Decreased muscle volume was identified in GMax, GMed, and GMin on the affected side in the OA group when compared with the control group and these differences were related to severity of OA. Hip abduction and internal rotation strength was reduced in the OA group. Increased levels of fatty infiltration were identified in the affected limbs of the OA group for GMax (P>0.01) and GMin (P=0.04).
Conclusions: The affected limb of unilateral OA patients shows atrophy in GMin, GMed, and GMax that was related to severity of OA. OA patients showed reduced strength in hip abduction and internal rotation associated with these changes. Better targeted rehabilitation programs are required to reverse these structural and functional deficits.
Innovation in anatomy education abstract
G.C. Stephens,1 S. Paynter,1 C.E. Rees1 and M. Lazarus1
1 Monash University, Victoria, Australia
An ethical dilemma? : How anatomy education impacts healthcare students’ ethics
Introduction: Donor dissection remains debated anatomy pedagogy. While short-term anatomy knowledge gains may not be impacted by dissection, studies also suggest that students’ anxiety and stress levels are. However, compared to clinical settings, donor dissection may provide a lower stress environment for introductions to death and dying. To improve the knowledge base related to this anatomy education discourse, we evaluated the longitudinal impacts of donor dissection on healthcare students’ professional identity (PI).
Materials and Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study with Monash University student participants from physiotherapy and medicine involved online discussion forums during semester and inter-professional focus groups at the end of semesters. Preliminary themes were developed using framework analysis.
Results: Seven themes related to ethics in anatomical education were
identified: 1. Informed consent, 2. Non-maleficence, 3. Beneficence, 4. Dichotomy of personification versus objectification, 5. Duty of care, 6. Culture, and 7. Student response sophistication.
Interestingly, students’ ethical perceptions changed with time.
Conclusion: The impact of donor dissection on students’ perception of ethics is complicated. Prior to this study, most investigations focused only on pre- and post- scenarios. The longitudinal approach presented here suggests a strong impact of donor dissection on priming students’ focus on medical ethics, but also suggests that over time, this effect fades. This fading effect may be mitigated with intervention, which will be a focus of future studies. This research does suggest that donor dissection may have broader impacts on students than simply knowledge acquisition.