Drawing to Understand: Feasibility and Perceived Benefits of a Clerkship-Based Surgical Anatomy Drawing Session

Background Clinicians widely use explanatory diagrams to convey complex surgical anatomy and postoperative arrangements. However, undergraduate medical curricula rarely provide structured opportunities for students to practice this skill. Hence, learners may struggle to integrate anatomical knowledge into coherent spatial representations for clinical explanation. This study aimed to conduct an initial perception-focused evaluation of a clerkship-based drawing session, examining learners’ perceived importance of surgical anatomy diagrams and confidence in producing them. Methods In a single-institution repeated cross-sectional pre/post educational evaluation within one clerkship cohort, 30 medical students (5th year, n = 22; 6th year, n = 8) participated in a 90–120-min small-group session (2–6 learners) between September 2025 and December 2025. The session included a baseline drawing without references, an instructor-led live drawing with optional computed tomography imaging, redrawing under the same conditions, and individualized feedback emphasizing anatomical accuracy and spatial coherence. Anonymous pre- and post-session questionnaires were administered to assess perceived importance and confidence using 5-point Likert scales. Post-session items were used to evaluate perceived improvement and overall satisfaction. Because the questionnaires were anonymous, pre- and post-session distributions were compared as independent samples using the Mann–Whitney U test. Results Approximately 83.3% of participants reported no prior experience drawing gastrointestinal reconstruction diagrams or organ diagrams depicting spatial relationships. Ratings of perceived importance (median [interquartile ranges (IQR)]: 4 [4–5] vs 5 [4.25–5]; p = 0.014) and confidence (2 [1–2] vs 4 [3–4]; p < 0.001) were significantly higher after the session than pre-session ratings. Effect sizes were r = 0.277 for importance and r = 0.645 for confidence. Ratings of perceived improvement and overall satisfaction were high (median [IQR]: 4.5 [4–5] and 5 [4–5], respectively). Paired drawings illustrated common baseline misconceptions and, after redrawing, more coherent spatial representations. Conclusions A structured drawing session during surgical clerkship was feasible and associated with higher post-session ratings of perceived importance and confidence in creating surgical anatomy diagrams. Future studies should incorporate linked pre- and post-assessments, rubric-based scoring, and multi-institutional replication to determine whether these perceived gains translate into improved diagram accuracy and explanatory quality. Trial registration Not applicable.