ArticleCureus2021
Compliance With the Cauda Equina Pathway: Results of a Closed-Loop Audit.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of functional task training on physical performance in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European geriatric medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Benchmarking Generative Artificial Intelligence for the Analysis of Racial and Gender Disparities in Academic Ophthalmology.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) and Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) recommend urgent MRI imaging and operative intervention in patients with suspected cauda equina syndrome (CES). Due to the lack of a 24-hour MRI service and the centralisation of neurosurgery to large tertiary centres, there is a need for an evidence-based protocol for the referral of patients presenting with back pain, with red flags to specialist tertiary neurosurgical centres. Methods The standard operating procedure (SOP) at our local hospital outlines steps in the assessment, triage and onward referral of patients presenting with symptoms of acute CES. A closed-loop audit cycle was performed; the first cycle was between September and December 2020 and the second was between January and April 2021. Recommendations made after the first cycle were actioned prior to re-audit. Results There was 100% compliance regarding discussions with neurosurgery following MRI and appropriate management following neurosurgical advice. There was a 21.1% increase in appropriate discussions with neurosurgery by the emergency department (ED), increased accurate documentation of red flags (5% anal tone and 21% perianal sensation). There was a 53% decrease in senior ED doctor referral to neurosurgery, although 100% referrals were discussed with an ED senior prior to referral, and a 20% decrease in compliance regarding neurosurgery plan documentation. Conclusion We were able to improve our compliance with several aspects of the SOP using simple measures. We could not improve one aspect of SOP, namely, a discussion with the specialist centre being performed by a senior doctor. Since CES requires timely management and early scanning, we recommend a robust protocol at the admitting hospital. This paper presents the protocol at our hospital and the rationale behind it. We discuss what affects our compliance with the SOP and how simple interventions have helped us improve.
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.