Background: Plastic surgery residents are required to contribute to the scientific milieu, apart from honing their surgical skills. Data regarding their academic and clinical background are limited locally in comparison with their counterparts. This is the first study of its kind on the Saudi training program, with suggested potential solutions to shortcomings. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study based on an electronic, 27-element, self-administered questionnaire sent to a WhatsApp group gathering all 40 plastic surgery residents of the Saudi program, with the exclusion of a single participant. Results: The mean of overall residents’ publications was 2.29 articles. No significant difference ( P = 0.438) was found in the number of publications among residents of different levels. However, seniors have published significantly ( P = 0.002) more articles (mean = 1.6; SD = 1.24) during residency compared with juniors (mean = 0.42; SD = 1). The group that had taken rotations in plastic surgery abroad published more articles ( P = 0.02) than the group that did not. Using η correlation, a positive correlation ( η = 0.36) was found between taking courses in research and publication. Conclusions: The Saudi plastic surgery residents are ahead of their colleagues in other local specialties but fall behind their counterparts internationally. The relatively poor contribution in terms of research, posters, and oral presentations could be remedied with measures such as providing protected research time and mentorship. They should be emboldened to pursue postgraduate studies, as only 3 residents had a Master of Science degree.

Background: The world has faced an unprecedented challenge in controlling the spread of COVID-19—a rapid reshaping of the healthcare system and education was inevitable. Consequently, residency programs adopted e-learning as a social distancing tool for the continuity of the learning process. In this study, we explore the opinions and perspectives of plastic surgery attending doctors and residents on the implications of e-learning. Methods: After obtaining ethical approval, this cross-sectional study was conducted electronically between October and December 2020 among plastic surgery residents and board-certified plastic surgeons in Saudi Arabia. Participants completed a validated, anonymous, self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire gathered participants’ demographic data, perceptions of online webinars, and audiovisual evaluations. Finally, we compared traditional (in-person) teaching with online webinars. The analysis was performed at a 95% confidence interval using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 23.0 (IBM, Armonk, N.Y.). Results: A total of 61 responses were included in this study. The majority of respondents (78.7%) were comfortable during webinars, with 38 (62.3%) believing they should supplement traditional teaching methods. Overall, 50.8% were satisfied with the webinars. However, 37.7% were neutral. Most believed that the webinars increased their clinical (67.2%) and surgical skills (67.2%) to reasonable levels. Conclusions: Online education provided an excellent educational tool as a viable option to supplement traditional face-to-face training, with most residents being satisfied, supporting the use of this educational tool. More objective research is required to refine existing online plastic surgery teaching methods while creating novel distance e-learning approaches for the future.

Background: The use of autologous grafts is a standard reconstructive option in plastic surgery. The absence of a well-established protocol for decontamination after accidental contamination increases the risk of postoperative infection. We aimed to explore the current practice and decontamination methods among Saudi plastic surgeons. This would help develop a well-established, unified method of decontamination intraoperatively. Methods: A validated self-administered questionnaire cross-sectional study was conducted in February 2022. The questionnaire was distributed through social media to all board-certified plastic surgeons in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire was designed to obtain data on incidents, treatment preferences, and management of autograft contamination. Results: A total sample size of 61 participants was included, with an overall response rate of 64.58%. Out of the 61 respondents, 73.8% (n = 45) had previously experienced graft contamination. Regarding the methods of graft contamination, the most common way was accidentally dropping the graft on the floor (39.7%, n = 25). The majority of the surgeons answered that they decontaminated the graft using povidone-iodine (44.6%, n = 29) and then used it (45.9%, n = 28). The lower extremity area was the most common anatomical location having surgery at the time of the graft contamination, accounting for 32.5% of the cases (n = 25). Conclusions: Our study indicates that graft contamination is a common occurrence among our population, but we lack national guidelines on dealing with these situations. Although most responders used adequate decontamination methods, the lack of standardization could pose a risk to patients.

No abstract