An interventional study of Suture skills retention in Medical Education, Simulation Training and Medical Student, sponsored by Medical University of Lodz. Completed at 3 sites in Poland. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-27.
Sponsored by Medical University of Lodz · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching surgical suturing techniques using various materials (e.g., banana peel, orange peel, pork, chicken, and silicone pads). The study results will help identify the most effective teaching materials and methods, which will contribute to optimizing educational programs and improving the quality of training for future surgeons.
Medical University of Lodz is the lead sponsor of 107 studies on the registry; 10 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Medical students with no prior suturing experience and no known allergies to the materials used who are willing to participate in suturing on porcine skin, banana, chicken, or orange in Round 1, then on silicone model in Round 2.
Procedure: Suture skills retention
Medical students with no prior suturing experience and no known allergies to the materials used who are willing to participate in suturing on a silicone model in Round 1, then on a silicone model in Round 2.
Procedure: Suture skills retention
Medical students with no prior formal experience in surgical suturing are randomly assigned to practice on one of five training materials using computer-generated randomisation: silicone pad, porcine skin, chicken tissue, banana peel or orange peel (study arm). All participants attend a lecture led by an experienced surgeon (academic teacher). After this, in Round 1, they practise suturing using a standardised protocol, supervised by experienced surgeons (four per group). In Round 2, trainees from all groups (silicone, porcine, chicken, banana, and orange) perform suturing on silicone pads (standardised material exposure, control arm). A pre-specified random subsample from each Round 1 arm are invited to Round 2 due to logistical constraints; selection is not performance-based. Consequently, if Round 2 has a smaller sample size than Round 1, and paired analyses of Round 1 and Round 2 would be performed only for participants with data available at both time points.
Also known as: Skill retention
Trainee-reported outcomes
Immediately after practice, trainees complete a questionnaire rating the training material and the learning experience. Four items are measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1-5): material comfort/usability, perceived realism (similarity to human skin), perceived understanding of basic suturing principles, and perceived development of practical skills. Additionally, trainees rate their confidence in placing sutures on a 0-10 numeric scale.
Time frame: 1 day
Expert-rated technical outcomes
Experienced surgeons evaluate students' sutures across multiple domains, each scored on a 1-5 scale (1 = worst, 5 = best). For students who do not complete the task, a score of "0" is recorded, and the result is excluded from the qualitative analysis. Technical endpoints are analysed separately for simple interrupted domains, vertical mattress domains, and global composite scores, defined as the mean across available domains within a suture type. Composite scores will first be calculated at the participant level as the mean across available domains. Group-level summaries will be presented as medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) due to the non-normal distribution of scores.
Time frame: 1 day
PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.
Plan to share: Yes
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.