ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2022
Discordance Between Perceptions and Experience of Lumbar Puncture: A Prospective Study.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing medical training with augmented reality and haptic feedback simulator: outcomes of a randomized controlled trial on lumbar puncture.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Oral fluid supplementation for the prevention of post-dural puncture headache: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Effect of immersive virtual reality on pain and anxiety during lumbar puncture: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- 3DFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- The path to leptomeningeal metastasis.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2024Review
- Article
- Factors influencing refusal of lumbar puncture in children under age 10: a cross-sectional study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- The Spectrum of Headache in Leptomeningeal Metastases: A Comprehensive Review with Clinical Management Guidelines.Current pain and headache reports · 2023Review
- Simulator-Based Training Sustainably Improves Confidence, Theoretical Knowledge, and Success Rates in Lumbar Puncture Among Medical Students: A Prospective Case-Control Study.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Novel diagnostic techniques and neurologic biomarkers have greatly expanded clinical indications for CSF studies. CSF is most commonly obtained via lumbar puncture (LP). Although it is generally believed that LPs are well tolerated, there is a lack of supportive data for this claim, and patients anticipate LP to be painful. The objective of this study was to prospectively investigate discordance between patient perception and tolerability of LP. Methods: Adult patients were surveyed before and after LP regarding their perceptions and experience of LP. Physician perceptions were gathered through a web-based survey. Relative risk and Spearman correlation were used to assess the relationship between responses. Paired binomial and paired ordinal responses were compared by McNemar and paired Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Results: A total of 178 patients completed the surveys. About half of the patients (58%) reported anxiety pre-LP, at median 3.0 of 10. Physicians overpredicted patients' pre-LP anxiety (median score 5.0, Discussion: LP was generally well tolerated. The majority of patients experienced minimal pain. Anticipation of pain was correlated with both feeling anxious and experiencing pain. The results of this study can be used to reassure patients and providers that LP is indeed not as painful as imagined, which may both reduce pre-LP anxiety and improve LP tolerability.
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.