ArticleBMJ open quality2019
Expediting the management of cauda equina syndrome in the emergency department through clinical pathway design.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessment and early investigation of cauda equina syndrome- a systematic review of existing international guidelines and summary of the current evidence.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Pooled it
- Definition and surgical timing in cauda equina syndrome-An updated systematic review.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cauda equina syndrome: a structured approach for the higher orthopaedic examination.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Review
- Updated perspective: STAT surgery for significant cauda equina syndromes.Surgical neurology international · 2026Review
- Cauda equina syndrome-most frequent referral diagnosis to a tertiary spinal centre: a retrospective study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Cauda Equina Syndrome: A Survey of Guideline Utilisation in Primary Care in England.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Improving the suspected cauda equina syndrome pathway at a district general hospital: a quality improvement project.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Exploring physiotherapist's ability to identify cauda equina syndrome early.Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2025Article
- Chiropractic Management of a Symptomatic Patient Who Previously Had Surgery for Cauda Equina Syndrome.Journal of chiropractic medicine · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a neurosurgical emergency. Early diagnosis with MRI and subsequent surgical decompression surgery can prevent permanent neurological dysfunction. Charing Cross Hospital (CXH) is a tertiary neurosurgical referral centre where in the emergency department (ED), current practice mandated a neurosurgery review prior to requesting MRI. Hypothesis: It was hypothesised that a new clinical pathway, with better coordination from the ED, radiology and neurosurgical teams could reduce the time of presentation to diagnosis or exclusion of CES. Method: Retrospective case-note analysis of patients presenting with back pain to CXH ED over a 3-month period was performed. The primary outcome was the time interval between the patient's arrival to the ED and the MRI preliminary report. Results: The baseline primary outcome was recorded at 8 hours and 16 min (n=30). A new clinical pathway was designed empowering ED senior decision makers to order MRIs prior to neurosurgical review. Two Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles were performed, each measured over a 2-month period. The first PDSA cycle was performed after the pathway was initially launched (n=17), while the second PDSA cycle measured the effect of staff education and active promotion of the pathway (n=17). MRI was requested earlier, waiting and reporting time for MRI were reduced. The exclusion or diagnosis of CES was reduced to 5 hours and 54 min in PDSA 1 and 5 hours 17 min in PDSA 2, a 29% and 36% reduction (p=0.048 and p=0.012, respectively). Conclusion: The clinical protocol was a cost-neutral and sustainable intervention that effectively reduced the time taken to diagnose or exclude CES and ED waiting times.
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.