ArticleWorld neurosurgery: X2025
From hospital discharge to long-term care: Unmet rehabilitation needs in cauda equina syndrome patients from a national UK cohort.
Article in World neurosurgery: X, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Although long term disability may be a consequence of cauda equina syndrome (CES), the evidence base for the effect of rehabilitation or different rehabilitation strategies is lacking. Our aim was to understand long term neurological deficits (understood as rehabilitation needs) and current rehabilitation provision for patients with CES. Methods: We retrospectively analysed data from a large UK wide cohort of CES patients presenting between 1st June 2018 and 31st May 2019. Rehabilitation referrals and attendance were described, and symptoms at discharge and one year were identified as potential targets for rehabilitation. Results: Physiotherapy was the most common inpatient rehabilitation service accessed following surgery for CES (572/610, 94%). Few patients were referred to specialist spinal rehabilitation services at discharge (49/608, 8%). At one year follow up there were high rates of residual symptoms (motor (66%), bladder (20%), bowel (17%), and sexual dysfunction (13%)). There was a significantly higher level of ongoing bladder dysfunction in females (27%) compared with males (11%) despite similar levels at presentation (females 84% vs males 82%). Conclusion: Referral to specialist spinal rehabilitation following CES surgery is not routine in the UK but a notable proportion of patients have ongoing symptoms at one year following surgical decompression. Prospective studies of rehabilitation strategies following surgery for CES are needed to guide treatment decisions and optimise post-surgical outcomes.
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.