Purpose Management of partial thickness burns is varied between specialist burns units, suggesting a number of effective treatment options exist and available evidence has been unable to identify a clearly superior option. Outcomes such as time to wound healing, pain, infection, need for skin grafting and scarring all affect clinical decision making. In the paediatric setting, the frequency, duration and ease of dressing changes are especially important in determining a standard of care. In recent years, a German dressing Suprathel®, which first launched in 2004, has been the focus of a growing body of literature as a potential alternative to other commonly used skin substitutes such as porcine xenograft. Methodology A literature review was conducted, to analyse available data comparing the effectiveness of Suprathel® with other available treatments for partial thickness burns. Results Available literature includes several randomised control studies, retrospective comparative studies and literature reviews comparing Suprathel® with other skin substitutes and synthetic wound dressings. Suprathel® use is associated with shorter hospital stay, less frequent dressing changes under general anaesthesia, lower need for grafting and lower need for long term reintervention, when compared with other treatments for partial thickness burns. Conclusion The existing data appear to support Suprathel® as a valid treatment option for partial thickness burns. Prospective trials with long-term follow up are scarce, which would be valuable in understanding its impact on future scar management. Further cost-benefit analysis is also warranted to understand broader health economic implications before adopting a new standard of care.