Can a Projected Image Test Replace the Traditional Gross Anatomy Spot Test?

Introduction: Conducting traditional gross anatomy spot (spotter/tag) (3D) in the laboratory is becoming increasingly difficult due to the large number of students and shortage of staff. This study aimed to assess the practicality of conducting projected gross anatomy image test (2D) conducted in a lecture hall for first year medical undergraduates and assessing their performance and attitudes towards this form of testing.  
Material and Methods: First-year medical undergraduates were subject to two forms of gross anatomy testing in the form of traditional spot test (3D) and projected gross anatomy image test (2D). An online questionnaire was administered to the students to gain information regarding their attitudes regarding the two types of examinations. Descriptive analysis and one-sample T-test was used to compare the results .   
Results: Sample consisted of 248 students. There were 149 females (60%). Mean age in years was 21.34 (SD=2.3). The mean projected image test scores out of hundred was 70% (SD=3.14). The mean score for the OSPE component of the Y1S1 examination was 63.3% (SD=4.11). The observe difference in the means was statistically significant (p<0.001).
Conclusion: While the projected gross anatomy image test (2D) was less time consuming and easy to setup and the students performed better in it they prefer the gross anatomy spot (3D) type of test. Both types have their advantages and disadvantages and maybe used in combination to reduce examination time and invigilator requirements.