EP.TU.153Face to face teaching in the covid era: Basic Surgical Skill Development

Aims According to literature,newly qualified doctors are at risk of being unable to perform practical procedures safely. This has been exacerbated by the disruptions to training and education which the covid-19 pandemic has caused. This intensive course has been developed to improve basic surgical skills and improve confidence in simple wound closure, to mitigate these disruptions. Methods Candidates attended a three-part course in small groups, where they learned hand ties, basic laparoscopic skills and wound closure on animal models. Self assessment data were collected pre and post workshop on a Likert scale. All data was assessed using basic descriptive analysis. Results Data was collected from 13 participants (M:F, 5:8) at the level of foundation year 1(61.5%,n=8) and foundation year 2(38.5%,n=5). Only 38.5% (n = 5) had previous basic surgical skills training. Our delegates reported an improvement in the following surgical skills: suturing (n = 11, 84.6%), hand tying (n = 10, 76.9%), laparoscopic skills (n = 10, 76.9%). Overall 61.5% (n = 8) of our delegates reported an improvement in all three domains. Conclusions Participants reported limited exposure prior to this course despite successfully completing an undergraduate curriculum. Overall, participants' self-scores improved in all three taught surgical skills. We believe ourcourse is a practical and reproducible solution to help bridge training gaps, which can be safely conducted with social distancing measures.

934 Remote one-to-one virtual surgical skills training: Evolving the delivery of operative skills training in the UK

Introduction COVID-19 has had an unprecedented effect on surgical training, including prerequisite entry-level courses to speciality training. We describe the implementation of a virtual, one-to-one training programme aimed at the acquisition and retention of operative skills. Methods Enrolment commenced 8th May 2020 for wound closure techniques or an extended programme including tendon repairs, delivered by Specialist Registrars in Plastic Surgery using Zoom® (v. 5.0.5) via mobile device. Participant feedback was collected retrospectively using a 5-point scale following course completion. Results 5 participants completed the wound closure programme, and 3 the extended programme, over an average of 5 weeks, with 2 sessions per week. 5 participants were male, 3 female and were of the following grades: 2 CT2, 4 FY2, 1 FY1 and 1 medical student. A total of 103.5 hours of training was recorded to 7 September 2020. Participants reported that all virtual skills taught were readily transferable to the theatre environment. Following the course, all participants felt confident to complete the skills learnt independently, rating the course as excellent. Conclusions The COVID-19 crisis has placed insurmountable obstacles in the face of surgical training. With further validation, we aim to develop surgical skills training with virtual, easily reproducible, cost-effective, trainee centred programmes.

Virtual interactive surgical skills classroom (VIRTUAL): a parallel-designed, non-inferiority, adjudicator-blinded, randomised controlled trial

Introduction Virtual classroom training (VCT) is a novel educational method that permits accessible, distanced interactive expert instruction. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of VCT in comparison to face-to-face training (FFT) and non-interactive computer-based learning (CBL) for basic surgical skills training. Methods 72 participants recruited from five London medical schools underwent stratified block randomisation into three equal intervention groups based on subjective and objective suturing experience. VCT was delivered via the BARCO weConnect platform and FFT was provided by expert instructors. Optimal student-to-teacher ratio was used, 12:1 for VCT and 4:1 for FFT. The assessed task was interrupted suturing with hand-tied knots. The primary outcome was post-intervention Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score, adjudicated by two blinded experts and adjusted for baseline proficiency. Results VCT was non-inferior to FFT (adjusted difference 0.44, 95% CI: -0.54 to 1.75, delta 0.675), VCT was superior to CBL (adjusted difference 1.69, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.96) and FFT was superior to CBL (adjusted difference 1.25, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.29). FFT alone was associated with student travel expenses (mean £4.88, SD 3.70). Instructor hours used per student for VCT and FFT were 0.25 and 0.75, respectively. Conclusion VCT has a similar educational benefit to FFT and is a suitable modality of high-quality surgical skills education. VCT provides greater accessibility and resource efficiency compared to FFT. VCT satisfies the requirement for social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic and is better than non- interactive CBL. VCT has the potential to improve global availability and accessibility of surgical skills training.