ArticlePhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy2026
Physiotherapist's Management of Suspected Cauda Equina Syndrome in the United Kingdom: A National Survey.
Article in Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeCauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a rare but serious spinal condition requiring urgent diagnosis and management. Physiotherapists in UK musculoskeletal (MSK) services increasingly encounter suspected CES cases, but little is known about their clinical decision-making and referral practices. This study aimed to examine the clinical decision-making processes of UK physiotherapists when presented with three clinical vignettes of suspected CES and to identify themes in referral handover methods when emergency care is deemed necessary.
methodsAn online survey featuring three clinical case vignettes was distributed to UK physiotherapists. Respondents were asked about their referral decisions, clinical reasoning, and preferred methods of handover to Accident & Emergency (A&E) services. Thematic analysis was used to identify common clinical reasoning patterns and referral practices.
resultsThe presence of altered bladder function was the strongest predictor of referral to A&E, consistent with previous literature. Sexual dysfunction was also a significant referral factor when present. Themes for not referring included recent A&E attendance, plans for in-clinic assessment, specialist consultation, and requesting urgent MRI scanning. A range of handover methods were reported, with written letters and direct phone calls being the most common. Variation in clinical decision-making was evident, particularly regarding timing and urgency of investigations, reflecting some uncertainty around guideline interpretation. DISCUSSION: Findings demonstrate variability in UK physiotherapists' approaches to suspected CES management, with some respondents opting for community assessment or delayed imaging despite CES's urgent nature. Findings emphasise the need for clearer, unified guidelines on referral pathways and handover methods to reduce delays and improve patient outcomes. Future research should explore the impact of recent guideline updates and include perspectives from other healthcare professionals involved in CES care.
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.