Depth of anatomy for step 1 in FA vs Firecracker

[Tajima]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have been preparing for step 1 and am confused about the depth of anatomy knowledge that is expected to achieve a score of 240 or above.

I have been using Firecracker as well as FA and find that FA is light on anatomy (nerve roots and some classic presentations) while firecracker asks questions about specific muscle attachments, nerve pathways, and actions. Some of this stuff gets pretty detailed.

For those who have scored above 240, how did you prepare for anatomy? For those that have used Firecracker successfully, did you find the level of anatomy tested in Firecracker to be overkill?

 

[tasar1898]

The consensus seems to be that you should know whats on FA really well and guess on the others.. not worth memorizing an atlas or something for the 2-3q's per block that are not gonna be on FA

 

[Apoplexy__]

Firecracker anatomy is easily overkill; FA is all you need.

2-3 Anatomy Q's on my entire test out of something like 1-2 Q's per block weren't in FA, and were pretty obscure. I doubt they would have even been on Firecracker. One of these Q's was something I somehow recalled from my Anatomy textbook from reading 1 year earlier that I never saw in any other resource.

 

[Tajima]

What about neuroanatomy? First Aid seems limited in that regard. To those who have written step 1 and have achieved a high score, did you find that you had to supplement FA with other sources for neuroanatomy?

 

[mymembernames]

FC is overwhelming or maybe it's just me...

 

[Apoplexy__]

What about neuroanatomy? First Aid seems limited in that regard. To those who have written step 1 and have achieved a high score, did you find that you had to supplement FA with other sources for neuroanatomy?

Also wondering about this for NBME.

Nope -- FA is enough.

The only Neuro stuff I felt I had to supplement a little bit was radiological neuroanatomy (spend 15-30 minutes the day before your exam on http://w-radiology.com/chest_ct.php and you'll be good) and stroke pathologies (e.g. amyloid angiopathy vs. lacunar infarcts vs. thromboembolic occlusion). The stroke pathologies were adequately covered in UWorld.

 

[malin]

What about neuroanatomy? First Aid seems limited in that regard. To those who have written step 1 and have achieved a high score, did you find that you had to supplement FA with other sources for neuroanatomy?

Scored 250+. Only anatomy I looked at was FA and whatever anatomy in UWorld I wrote into FA. And you know what? I got a fair bit of anatomy questions for which I wouldn't have found in FA alone. Anatomy maybe compromises 5% of UWorld questions, but I felt like I had at least 10% of my test as anatomy (so like 30-40 questions). It made me extremely uncomfortable at times, and I was worried it was going to lower me a lot, and I kept telling myself during the exam that I wish I did more anatomy prep.

But it worked out fine in the end. Would I have changed much looking back? It's hard to say b/c pathology, pharm, and microbio are the three subjects you really need to know inside out to score well, but of course to score even higher you have to know some more biochem and anatomy. It's not worth trying to spend so much time memorizing every detail in BRS anatomy when you could be spending that time perfecting pathology and pharm. I saw very little biochem on my exam (far less than the 10% it makes up in UWorld). One thing I will say is to know neuroanatomy/head and neck better than any other organ system. So looking back, I would have reviewed some more neuroanatomy outside of FA. That is the most high yield anatomy section, followed by musculoskeletal. For example, a picture of a skull/brain cavity is nowhere to be found in First Aid (maybe UWorld). You might want to take a closer look at that for your exam. Examiners know exactly what's in FA and UW and what's not, so they can bounce around those at times.

Still, it's better to know 95% of FA Anatomy than it is 50% of BRS anatomy. Focus on FA primarily.

 

[worldbeater]

I am towards the latter half of my prep, so haven't take it yet. For anatomy, we are kind of on our own, it's either you know it or you don't. And I definitely don't/didn't know most of it..haha. I looked at FA, even matching the page numbers to the specific World question wasn't working. There isn't enough detail in FA in my opinion. FC is too much info, so I figured out another way to make it work.

I just make flash cards out of the UWorld anatomy questions I kept getting wrong. Straight up index cards with the vignettes on the front and diagrams on the back done in colored pencil. It was really effective, I noticed patterns like I missed the common perioneal nerve 6x(!) in various forms. There are about 100 questions that I have problems with, so I just did this, and it didn't take that long, about a full weekend. One you really figure out where you blanking out on the info, you can fit multiple questions on one diagram. I just shuffle through it once in a while to refresh my memory, and I get most of the anat questions right when I hit them on World.

For neuroanatomy, I did the same thing, and if they put 12 landmarks in the answer description, I just remember the 2 closest landmarks next to the answer they want. Sort of learning neuro on the go..haha.

The NBMEs usually have like 5-8 anatomy questions (out of 200), so I figure the ratio will be the same on the real deal.

 

[mymembernames]

Scored 250+. Only anatomy I looked at was FA and whatever anatomy in UWorld I wrote into FA. And you know what? I got a fair bit of anatomy questions for which I wouldn't have found in FA alone. Anatomy maybe compromises 5% of UWorld questions, but I felt like I had at least 10% of my test as anatomy (so like 30-40 questions). It made me extremely uncomfortable at times, and I was worried it was going to lower me a lot, and I kept telling myself during the exam that I wish I did more anatomy prep.

But it worked out fine in the end. Would I have changed much looking back? It's hard to say b/c pathology, pharm, and microbio are the three subjects you really need to know inside out to score well, but of course to score even higher you have to know some more biochem and anatomy. It's not worth trying to spend so much time memorizing every detail in BRS anatomy when you could be spending that time perfecting pathology and pharm. I saw very little biochem on my exam (far less than the 10% it makes up in UWorld). One thing I will say is to know neuroanatomy/head and neck better than any other organ system. So looking back, I would have reviewed some more neuroanatomy outside of FA. That is the most high yield anatomy section, followed by musculoskeletal. For example, a picture of a skull/brain cavity is nowhere to be found in First Aid (maybe UWorld). You might want to take a closer look at that for your exam. Examiners know exactly what's in FA and UW and what's not, so they can bounce around those at times.

Still, it's better to know 95% of FA Anatomy than it is 50% of BRS anatomy. Focus on FA primarily.

Did you feel FA was enough for micro? Thanks!

 

[malin]

Did you feel FA was enough for micro? Thanks!

The micro in FA and UW was enough, yes. I think it helps to read a more detailed textbook during the year (like clinical micro made ridiculously simple) to learn some of the concepts surrounding the important bugs. But when you're just studying for boards, just know the micro in FA/UW inside out. I didn't use Goljan that much but it would sometimes delve deeper into pathology of pathogens like hepatitis; I think sometimes you need to read a textbook summary of some of the more complex pathogens like HIV or hepatitis so that when you read their corresponding sections in First Aid, you can make sense of what's going on. If you just read the HIV/hepatitis sections in First Aid as your first exposure to the material, you may not really know what's going on b/c they've condensed it so much.