O019 Comparison of skin substitute materials for use in remote surgical skill education

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Simulation training is increasing in popularity within the medical field. It provides a safe, reproducible environment in which learners can build upon surgical skills. The current pandemic has reduced workplace opportunities for learning, with decreased theatre opportunities and a high volume of trainees seeking training. In order for realistic skill development synthetic substitute materials have a role in facilitating training of suturing, excision, local flaps and other skills. The aims of this review were to compare commercially available synthetic materials for use in remote surgical skill training. Methods 8 commercially available skin substitutes were included in this review; felt, foam dressing, a generic silicone skin pad, Sigma Lance Basic, Sigma Lance Advanced, Sigma Lance Infinity, Suture Doctor, and Limbs & Things. A questionnaire was distributed to 30 medical students, surgical trainees and consultants consisting of 8 criteria pertaining to surgical skills and similarity to skin. Cutometry and durometry data was obtained and compared to skin on the face, arm and back of 3 healthy participants under the age of 30. Results Overall, felt had the poorest outcomes in all domains. Foam dressing was comparable to skin on the face, back and arm for both cutometry and durometry. Foam dressing was comparable to commercially available skin pad results in the questionnaire. Conclusion Foam dressings are comparable to commercially available skin pads in application of surgical skills, and are a cost-effective alternative to facilitate delivery of remote training of surgical trainees. Take-home message Foam dressings constitute an alternative, comparable and cost-effective synthetic material for remote surgical skill development, particularly suturing, excision and local flap design.