ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2026
'Everyone has their own way-there's no protocol'. An Australian qualitative study of clinician perspectives on the management of low anterior resection syndrome.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Process of Adapting to Altered Bowel Function in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Grounded Theory Study.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
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
aimTo identify clinicians' perceived challenges and barriers in the management of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) through exploration of attitudes and decision-making practices around screening, diagnosis and management.
methodExploratory interpretive qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken and a reflexive thematic qualitative analysis was conducted using an iterative-inductive approach.
resultsEleven colorectal surgeons, six physiotherapists and three specialist nurses were interviewed. Data were grouped into four major themes and 13 sub-themes. Variation in clinician engagement with LARS was identified, with clinicians' knowledge, training and personal interest in managing patients raised by participants as contributing factors. An absence of standardized management pathways presented challenges in clinical practice with the lack of structured multidisciplinary approaches and referral pathways combined with a perceived lack of established treatment guidelines impacting on clinical decision-making. Inequities in access to specialist pelvic services and treatment were identified as systemic limitations which influence clinical decision-making in relation to clinical practice and implementation of patient care. The interpretation of the patient experience with LARS and perceptions of treatment acceptability were identified to influence clinical decision-making and demonstrated divergent perceptions of patient experience.
conclusionThis study identified several challenges in LARS management from a clinician's perspective. A lack of standardized treatment guidelines and pathways, limited treatment access, and inconsistent clinician engagement present challenges. Divergent perceptions of patient experience and treatment acceptability further complicate care. These findings highlight the urgent need to address these systemic limitations through enhanced surgeon education, standardized treatment/referral guidelines, improved patient resources and expanded access to multidisciplinary 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.