Bluegrass Biodesign: Why an Integrated Biomedical Engineering Curriculum is Crucial for Medical Education

Ankur Gupta; Danh Tran; Daniel Nguyen; Elizabeth Bridwell; Hanna Thompson; Faizan Ahmed; Jennifer K Brueckner-Collins; Hermann Frieboes; In Kim; Beth Spurlin

doi:10.7759/cureus.47261

Bluegrass Biodesign: Why an Integrated Biomedical Engineering Curriculum is Crucial for Medical Education

Cureus. 2023 Oct 18;15(10):e47261. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47261. eCollection 2023 Oct.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Department of Medical Education, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, USA.
² Department of Emergency Medicine, Duke University, Durham, USA.
³ Department of Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, USA.
⁴ Department of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, USA.
⁵ Department of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, USA.

Abstract

Background Medical education often overlooks the significance of design and innovation literacy, resulting in a knowledge gap in undergraduate medical education (UME) regarding formal training in these areas. Incorporating innovation into UME's core curriculum is crucial as future physicians will encounter evolving technologies, and fostering a transdisciplinary approach can enable collaborative problem-solving and improve patient health outcomes. Methodology We developed a comprehensive medical biodesign curriculum focused on innovation, including problem identification, prototype testing, and product commercialization. Participants were selected based on applications, interviews, and diverse criteria. A survey was conducted before and after the program to assess students' biodesign experiences and knowledge, with data analyzed using descriptive statistics and paired t-tests. Results Of the 41 participants, 24 (58.5%) completed both pre- and post-program surveys. These five-point Likert surveys showed a significant shift from pre-program to responses demonstrating increased "comfort levels in explaining and applying biodesign principles" (p < 0.0001). Specifically, the "comfort level in taking a product to market" increased from 33% to 67% (p = 0.01), while the "comfort level in applying the biodesign process" increased from 29% to 92% (p < 0.0001). Moreover, 58.3% of participants expressed interest in continuing their current projects, and 70.8% of students stated feeling confident in generating ideas and solutions with their team members. Conclusions The medical biodesign curriculum demonstrated success in exposing undergraduate medical and engineering students to the concepts of medical innovation and biodesign. The program has led to a significant improvement in students' knowledge and comfort levels in applying the biodesign process and taking a product to market. The high level of interest and participation in the program highlight the need for incorporating innovative training in UME to foster creativity and prepare future physicians to contribute to the advancements in healthcare.

Keywords: biodesign; biodesign curriculum; biodesign innovation; biomedical engineering; healthcare technology; innovation; medical education; transdisciplinary engineering education; transdisciplinary medical education.