ArticleAnatomical sciences education2026
Preliminary insights on high-fidelity embalming solutions for surgical skills training-An evaluation using the McMaster Embalming Scale and mechanical tests.
Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Simulation-based training is critical for surgical skill acquisition and typically uses soft-preserved body donors, as they represent high-fidelity models (vs. hard-fixed donors) with prolonged periods of preservation (vs. unembalmed donors). While many soft-embalming solutions exist, there remains no standardization between centers nor evaluation of the solution-associated tissue suitability for surgical skills training. The current study aims to remedy that by systematically comparing qualitative ratings (McMaster Embalming Scale [MES]) and quantitative tissue properties (biomechanical testing) of four differentially embalmed tissues (Surgical Reality Fluid, Imperial College London; soft preservation solution, Ethanol-Phenol, and Saturated Salt Solution) captured during analogous clinical and mechanical tests (chest tube insertion and anchoring, bone sawing and electrocautery). MES and mechanical testing results uncovered significant differences across both embalming solutions used and skills performed. Based on these findings and considering cost/safety/accessibility features, ethanol-phenol emerged as an optimal solution for embalming tissues for surgical skills. Still, in comparison to live tissues examined in published studies, embalmed tissues tend to require substantially more force to cut and pierce, which may account for the modest suitability rankings observed across all embalmed tissues. Overall, this suggests that while solution-specific differences exist, their performance is comparable enough to accept any of those tested as adequate models for surgical skills training-an optimistic outcome for laboratories looking to manage both performance and practical concerns during embalming solution selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.