ArticleBMJ open2022
Medico-legal litigation of UK physiotherapists in relation to cauda equina syndrome: a multimethods study.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Physiotherapist's Management of Suspected Cauda Equina Syndrome in the United Kingdom: A National Survey.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2026Article
- The lived experiences of UK physiotherapists involved in Cauda Equina Syndrome litigation. A qualitative study.PloS one · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to investigate the extent of cauda equina syndrome (CES) litigation and explore the process of medico-legal litigation in relation to physiotherapy in the UK.
designA multimethods inquiry that followed on from a previously conducted scoping literature review was undertaken to address the aim. This included freedom of information requests and direct communication with relevant stakeholders and organisations.
resultsA total of 2496 CES claims were found in the UK between 2012 and 2020. 51 of these were attributed to physiotherapists. There was little information available to physiotherapists regarding the legal process of litigation and much of this information was not from a physiotherapist's perspective.
conclusionThis is the first study that has investigated the extent and process of CES litigation in physiotherapy in the UK. The extent of CES litigation appears to be high considering CES is a rare spinal condition. Furthermore, the extent of CES litigation is suspected to be considerably higher than the data reported in this study due to the issues identified in how CES claims are recorded. Finally, there is no clearly articulated, easily accessible information describing the process and support available for physiotherapists in receipt of a legal claim.
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.