ArticleMusculoskeletal care2022
Was the impact of COVID-19 on a spinal triage service as significant as expected? A retrospective service evaluation: Results and evaluation.
Article in Musculoskeletal care, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Operationalising routinely collected patient data in research to further the pursuit of social justice and health equity: a team-based scoping review.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Was the impact of COVID-19 on a spinal triage service as significant as expected? A retrospective service evaluation: Results and evaluation.Musculoskeletal care · 2022Article
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
objectivesThe aim of this evaluation was to review service outcomes for a spinal advanced practitioner physiotherapy (APP) triage service during COVID-19. The evaluation compares outcomes gathered against pre-pandemic data and evaluates the impact of the pandemic on service delivery.
designService-level data were extracted between 2019 and 2021 including: total referrals, new and follow-up appointments, telehealth consultation rates, discharges at first appointment, magnetic resonance imaging and injection request rates. Multidisciplinary-team (MDT) meeting notes with Spinal Surgeons were reviewed and surgical conversion calculated. Patient satisfaction data were collated using: Friends and Family test, specific questionnaires, individual and formal complaints and compliments, and telephone surveys. Analysis was performed by the lead author and results were compared between years using analysis of variance, as well as with previously reported data.
setting'Nottingham University Hospitals' National Health Services Trust is a secondary care spinal unit, using APPs to triage, assess and manage spinal conditions.
resultsIn 2020, 407 (22%; p = 0.02) less patients were referred to the service, however, there was a significant increase in the number of telehealth attendances (mean = 50% in 2020 from 2019, p = 0.005). Only 13% (n = 1342) patients were discussed at MDT, of which 8% (n = 808) were discussed for surgical consideration, and 36% (n = 268) were directly listed. High levels of patient satisfaction were reported by 89% (n = 1028 of 1160) patients.
conclusionThis service evaluation demonstrates a statistically significant change in numbers of patients referred and telehealth attendances in the year of the pandemic (2020). Surgical conversion declined during the pandemic, and did not recover post-pandemic.
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.