ArticleMusculoskeletal care2025
Cauda Equina Syndrome: A Survey of Guideline Utilisation in Primary Care in England.
Article in Musculoskeletal care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCauda equina syndrome (CES) is a spinal emergency. Over half of known cases first present to primary care for initial assessment. In February 2023, the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) national programme launched new CES guidelines, which included an important change in practice: a new urgent referral route.
aimThis study aims to explore the awareness and use of the GIRFT guidelines in a primary care setting in England. DESIGN AND
settingA cross-sectional online survey was used to collect data from primary care clinicians working across England.
methodUsing purposive sampling, the survey was shared with primary care clinicians across England and conducted between 21-10-2024 and 24-12-2024. The RE-AIM framework underpinned the survey design. Descriptive analysis was employed to interpret frequency and Likert data.
resultsA total of 515 responses were received from across all 42 integrated care boards in England. Of the 515 participants, 452 (88%) were aware of a CES guideline or pathway, with 297/515 (58%) being aware of the GIRFT guidelines. Two-thirds had access to a local CES pathway (n = 304/452, 67%). Nearly all clinicians highlighted that consulting either a local CES pathway or national guidelines supported their clinical decision making.
conclusionThis is the first study to investigate the awareness and utilisation of the GIRFT guidelines in primary care across England. The use of locally agreed CES pathways was shown to increase adherence to their recommendations in primary care. These findings suggest that using up-to-date local CES pathways can increase adherence to the GIRFT guidelines.
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.