Objectives. To assess health care professional's knowledge with regards to the urinary symptoms of CES and when treatment should be offered. Background. Recent articles in the medical press highlight the potential dangers of Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES). CES has the highest rates of litigation due to its long-term neurological impairment. Method. A 4-part questionnaire was given to 60 professionals. The participant was asked to rank 15 urinary symptoms, 7 of these symptoms were not related to CES, also the ideal time to surgical intervention for Complete CES and Incomplete CES. Results. A total of 44 questionnaires were analysed. CES symptoms were ranked significantly higher than then non-CES symptoms. The physiotherapists rated the CES symptoms significantly higher than the doctors (P = 0.05) and on average rated the non-CES symptoms significantly lower than doctors (P < 0.05). 87.8% thought that complete CES should be treated < 24 hours and 9.76% thought that complete CES should be treated from 24-48 hours. 46.34% thought that CESI should be treated < 24 hours and 43.9% thought that CESI should be treated from 24-48 hours. Conclusion. These results demonstrate that physiotherapists are better than Doctors at identifying the urinary symptoms in CES. The majority of health care professional who took part in this study stated that they would offer surgical intervention for both Complete and Incomplete CES within 24 hours. The gap in knowledge highlights the need for education to all medical professionals in the symptoms of CES and also the timing of treatment

Recent articles in the medical press highlight the potential dangers of Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES). CES has the highest rates of litigation due to its long-term neurological impairment, which can lead to devastating outcome on patients. The aim of this study was to assess health care professionals knowledge with regards to the urinary symptoms of CES and the timeframe in which treatment should be offered. To assess health care professionals knowledge with regards to urinary symptoms of CES and when treatment should be offered. A 4-part questionnaire established profession and number of cases seen per week. The participant was asked to rank 15 urinary symptoms, 7 of these symptoms were not related to CES. The participants were asked the ideal time to surgical intervention for Complete CES and Incomplete CES. Primary and Secondary Care. 60 questionnaires were complete. Participants had to successfully complete the first three parts of the questionnaire (n = 44). Any who failed to complete section four were excluded from analysis from that part only (n = 41). A total of 44 questionnaires were analysed. Both doctors and physiotherapists ranked the CES symptoms on average significantly higher than then the non-CES symptoms. The physiotherapists rated the CES symptoms significantly higher than the doctors (P = 0.05) and on average rated the non-CES symptoms significantly lower than doctors (P < 0.05). 87.8% thought that complete CES should be treated < 24 hours and 9.76% thought that complete CES should be treated from 24-48 hours. 46.34% thought that CESI should be treated < 24 hours and 43.9% thought that CESI should be treated from 24-48 hours. These results demonstrate that physiotherapists are better than Doctors at identifying the urinary symptoms in CES. The majority of health care professional who took part in this study stated that they would offer surgical intervention for both Complete and Incomplete CES within 24 hours. The gap in knowledge highlights the need for education to all medical professionals in the symptoms of CES and also the timing of treatment

Background. Recent articles in the medical press highlight the potential dangers of Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES). CES has the highest rates of litigation due to its long-term neurological impairment, which can lead to devastating outcome on patients. The aim of this study was to assess health care professionals knowledge with regards to the urinary symptoms of CES and the timeframe in which treatment should be offered. Objectives. To assess health care professionals knowledge with regards to urinary symptoms of CES and when treatment should be offered. Design. A 4-part questionnaire established profession and number of cases seen per week. The participant was asked to rank 15 urinary symptoms, 7 of these symptoms were not related to CES. The participants were asked the ideal time to surgical intervention for Complete CES and Incomplete CES. Setting. Primary and Secondary Care. Participants. 60 questionnaires were complete. Participants had to successfully complete the first three parts of the questionnaire (n = 44). Any who failed to complete section four were excluded from analysis from that part only (n = 41). Interventions. Nil. Outcome measures. As design. Results. A total of 44 questionnaires were analysed. Both doctors and physiotherapists ranked the CES symptoms on average significantly higher than then the non-CES symptoms. The physiotherapists rated the CES symptoms significantly higher than the doctors (P = 0.05) and on average rated the non-CES symptoms significantly lower than doctors (P < 0.05). 87.8% thought that complete CES should be treated < 24 hours and 9.76% thought that complete CES should be treated from 24-48 hours. 46.34% thought that CESI should be treated < 24 hours and 43.9% thought that CESI should be treated from 24-48 hours. Conclusion. These results demonstrate that physiotherapists are better than Doctors at identifying the urinary symptoms in CES. The majority of health care professional who took part in this study stated that they would offer surgical intervention for both Complete and Incomplete CES within 24 hours. The gap in knowledge highlights the need for education to all medical professionals in the symptoms of CES and also the timing of treatment

Introduction: Recent articles in the MPS Casebook (Cauda equina syndrome, Gardner and Morley) and BMJ (Cauda Equina Syndrome, Lavy) highlighted the potential dangers of Cauda equina syndrome (CES). CES has the highest rates of litigation due to the risk of symptoms not resolving and having a devastating impact on patients. This study aimed to assess clinician knowledge of the urinary symptoms of CES and the timeframe in which treatment should be offered. Method: A 4 part questionnaire was constructed. The first part established the status and type of health care professional. The second part assesses how many musculoskel-etal patients are seen in an average week. In the third part the participant is asked to rank 15 urinary symptoms; with 1 being the least alarming and 15 being the most alarming. 7 of the symptoms were not related to CES and so should have been ranked in the bottom seven. Lastly, to highlight an issue raise in the BMJ article; the participants were asked the ideal time to surgical intervention for Complete CES and Incomplete CES, with the options being within 24 hours; 24–48 hours; and 48 hours to 2 weeks. The questionnaire was distributed to Health Care Professionals in Southport and Ormskirk Hospital. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 23 participants (12 Doctors and 11 Physiotherapists). 90.91% of Physiotherapists and 10 Doctors (83.3%) managed to complete the questionnaire as specified. An average of 24 patients was seen by each professional (25 patients doctors; 31 patients Physiotherapist). The 7 false CES urinary symptoms were ranked in the bottom 7 in 76.40% of questionnaires (77.92% in Doctors; 81.82% in Physiotherapists). True CES urinary symptoms were ranked in the bottom 7 in 59.63% of cases (66.23% Doctors; 58.44% Physiotherapists). Finally 91.30% of those asked thought Complete CES should be treated within 24 hours (83.33% Doctors; 100% Physiotherapist); 56.52% thought Incomplete CES should be treated within 24 hours (66.67% Doctors; 45.45% Physiotherapists); 30.43% within 24 to 48 hours (8.33% Doctors; 54.55% Physiotherapists) and lastly 13.04% thought Incomplete CES should be treated within 2 weeks (25% Doctors and 0% of Physiotherapists). Conclusion: The results show that there is a gap in knowledge of all professional with regards to CES urinary symptoms and the optimal timing of treatment. The results showed that Physiotherapists are more likely to recognise True CES than doctors. False symptoms were ranked lower by Physiotherapists than Medical Professionals. These results demonstrate that physiotherapists are better than Doctors at identifying urinary symptoms in CES. Finally the majority of those asked would treat Complete and Incomplete CES within 24 hours. The gap in knowledge highlights the need for education to all medical personnel in the symptoms of Cauda Equina Syndrome and also the timing of treatment

Objective

Guidelines published by the British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) and Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) recommend urgent MRI imaging and intervention in individuals suspected of having CES. The need for an evidence based protocol is driven by a lack of 24/7 MRI services and centralisation of neurosurgery to tertiary centres, compounded by CES's significant medico-legal implications. We conducted an audit to evaluate the pathway for suspected CES in BCUHB West between 2018 and 2021.

Purpose. To establish if the subjective features of both bilateral leg pain and sexual dysfunction are presenting features in cauda equina syndrome (CES). Background. There appears to be conflicting expert opinion ‘red flag’ symptoms in the context of CES with many experts basing clinical decisions on the objective clinical findings only. Bilateral radiculopathy has been suggested as a possible sign of suspected CES, although a consensus statement by BASS and SBNS makes no reference to either this or sexual dysfunction. However, bilateral leg pain is included in the NICE clinical knowledge summary and sexual dysfunction is highlighted within CES guidance by the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. Methods. The clinical documentation of patients undergoing urgent magnetic resonance imaging (MR) due to clinical suspicion of cauda equina syndrome (CES) was reviewed over 12 months. Patients questioned regarding sexual function were included in this retrospective analysis (n=179), along with those with bilateral leg pain (n=294). Patients with confirmed cauda equina compression (CES +ve) were compared to those without (CES -ve). A logistic regression was applied to find the odds ratio. Results. In CES +ve 37.5% had sexual dysfunction, 48% had bilateral leg pain. CES –ve 14% had sexual dysfunction, 27% bilateral leg pain. Both significant to p=0.015 with an odds ratio of 3.6 and 2.5 respectively. Conclusions. Both sexual dysfunction and bilateral leg pain do appear to be ‘red flags’ for CES and should therefore be asked in the ED to aid clinical reasoning when suspecting this diagnosis. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Purpose and background. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES), a rare (<1 per 100,000) and potentially devasting condition, involves compression of the lumbosacral nerve roots. If not quickly identified and treated, it can lead to lasting disability, and high medicolegal costs (>£186 million in the decade to 2018). This study identified why people with suspected CES attend the emergency department (ED) and explored any delays in attending. Methods and Results. The design was a secondary analysis of a qualitative dataset comprising patients with back pain who attended the ED, undertaken using an interpretivist approach. Fourteen patients (8M:6F, aged 23–63 years) with suspected CES were purposively sampled from 4 EDs (2 Northern and 2 Southern) in England between August and December 2021. Semi-structured interviews were conducted online, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Acopia with pain was the biggest factor in a participant's decision to attend the ED, along with the need for a diagnosis. This pain was the worst ever experienced and debilitating, leaving people unable to cope and desperate for relief. 12/14 were advised to attend the ED following identification of red flags by: GPs (n=9); physiotherapists (n=2); surgical colleague (n=1); and 111 (n=1). Factors such as guilt, previous experience of being disregarded, and symptom misattribution were seen to cause delays in seeking care. Conclusion. This paper revealed a disconnect between the priorities of patients and clinicians prior to attending the ED. Clinicians need to validate the pain experience, communicate clearly why signs and symptoms are concerning, and convey the urgency and potential impact of CES. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. Funding for primary data: Health Education England & National. Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

Purpose and background. Cauda equina syndrome (CES) leads to nerve compression in the lumbar spine, and requires immediate treatment to prevent permanent neurological dysfunction, including urinary/anorectal incontinence. The consequences for the patient are significant as, in the decade to 2018, CES has cost the NHS £186,134,049. No study has reported patients’ experiences of being managed with suspected CES in an emergency department (ED), and this study explores patients’ experiences and how the NHS can optimise care for patients experiencing this condition. Methods and Results. In this qualitative secondary analysis, 14 participants (aged 23–63 years) with suspected CES were purposively sampled from 4 EDs in England. Online, semi-structed interviews were undertaken (in 2021, during the pandemic), and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were managed using a Framework approach and analysed thematically. Three themes were identified: quality of care; environmental factors; and expectations. The quality of care included managing uncertainty, the importance of communication, appropriate assessment and follow-up care. Environmental factors, including the chairs, waiting times and the busy nature of the ED, negatively impacted patients’ experiences. Furthermore, an expectation gap was identified, as most individuals came to the ED expecting to receive a scan, an accurate diagnosis and a cure. Despite frustrations, patients expressed gratitude towards the ED staff. Conclusion. This study highlights the importance of empathically acknowledging the patient's pain and providing comprehensive assessments and management plans for people attending ED with suspected CES. Optimising the ED environment to minimise patients’ pain and distress while waiting to access care is paramount and overdue. No conflicts of interest.  . Sources of funding. Funding for primary data: Health Education England & National Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

Background. Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a spinal condition requiring emergency spinal surgery once diagnosed. The patient-reported symptoms are often subtle and none have been shown to be sensitive or specific in confirming CES. Magnetic resonance image (MRI) is the diagnostic gold standard, and guidelines recommend MRI access within 24-hours of symptom presentation. Limited sequence MRI scans (sagittal T2 sequences of the whole spine) have been shown to successfully identify patients with scan-positive CES despite reducing the duration of an MRI. The aim of this audit was to examine utilisation of same-day MRI requests by spinal practitioners from a newly operational same-day emergency care spinal unit over the two-year period. Methods and results. Data was routinely collected over the two-year period and retrospectively reviewed. Data extraction occurred for cases of suspected CES with a same-day scan. Data extraction included type of MRI scan (lumbar/ whole spine/ CES protocol); outcome (admission/ discharge); final diagnosis. After clinical examination, only 258 (24% of 1085) suspected CES cases were identified and scanned within 24 hours, 58% (n=149) of which were with CES limited sequence scans. Only 12% (n=30) demonstrated scan- positive CES resulting in surgery within 24-hours. MRI same-day requests increased between 2020 (n=81, 21%) and 2021 (n=177, 26%), although utilisation of limited sequence scans improved (n=39, 48% in 2020; n=109, 62% in 2021). Conclusion. Limited sequence MRI scans are a time- and cost-saving means of providing screening for those with suspected CES. Improved utility was demonstrated over the 2-year period by the spinal practitioners. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No sources of funding

Purpose of study. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a surgical emergency. With Physiotherapists increasingly taking on first-contact and spinal triage roles, screening for CES must be as thorough and effective as possible. This study explores whether Physiotherapists are asking the correct questions, in the correct way and investigates their experiences when screening for this serious condition. Background. Thirty physiotherapists working in a community musculoskeletal service were purposively invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Data was transcribed and thematically analysed. Methods and Results. All participants routinely asked bladder, bowel function and saddle anaesthesia screening questions although only 9 routinely asked about sexual function. Whether questions are asked in the correct way has never been studied. Sufficient depth of questioning was achieved by 63% of participants, 76% used lay terminology and 73% used explicit language. Only 43% framed the questions before asking them and only 16% combined all four dimensions. Whilst most participants (n = 25) felt comfortable asking general CES questions, 50% reported feeling uncomfortable when asking about sexual function. Issues around; gender, culture and language were also highlighted. Conclusion. Four main themes emerged from this study; i) Physiotherapists ask the right questions but frequently omit sexual function questions, ii) mostly, Physiotherapists ask CES questions in a way that patients understand however, there needs to be improvement in framing the context of the questions, iii) Physiotherapists generally feel comfortable with CES screening but there is some awkwardness surrounding discussion of sexual function and iv) Physiotherapists perceive there to be barriers to effective CES screening caused by culture and language. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained. Previously presented poster at BritSpine 2021 and VPUK 2021

Background. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) needs to be diagnosed and managed promptly to ensure the best outcome for patients. Our current spinal service has been centralised, with referrals currently delivered via an online system. This means that patients aren't seen by spinal specialists until confirmed radiological diagnosis. To ensure patient safety, we must make sure that our CES pathway is as robust as possible. Methods & Results. A Google Forms questionnaire was emailed to various health professionals involved in the CES patient journey throughout the Lancashire & South Cumbria region. Participants were asked to identify problems with our current pathway and to provide possible solutions for improvement. 64 responses were received from 5 different departments throughout 6 NHS employers: 21 (33%) consultants, 6 (9%) middle grade doctors, 31 physiotherapists (48%), 3 (5%) GPs and 3 (5%) others. Many common themes were identified: the need to improve CES education to both referrers and patients (22% responses), addressing the issue of scan availability (39% responses), the need for a clearer pathway for GPs (26% responses) among others. Participants were asked to rate their confidence in the management of both suspected (mean=7.6 +/−2.3) and diagnosed CES (mean=8.0 +/− 2.0). Discussion. These results have made it evident that there is a need for improvement to our current CES pathway at all levels. Our current system is overloaded with poor referrals that backlog the MRI scanner, leading to delays. Providing training for referrers in the first instance may improve things, however a more thorough overhaul of the pathway is required. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained

Abstract. Background. Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a rare serious condition that, if missed at initial presentation, can lead to serious disability. Early diagnosis is crucial for a favourable outcome. Few studies included urodynamic test and measurement of post-void residual urine (PVR) as an adjunct screening tool for acute CES before proceeding to MRI scan, yet there are differences in the cut-off point as a threshold volume to be considered as a red flag for doing MRI amongst these studies. Aim. Meta-analysis and systematic review of literature that included PVR as a predictive tool in CES to identify the reliability of PVR and the optimal numerical value to be considered as red flag. Material & Methods. A comprehensive literature search was undertaken in PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases using our search strategy. Meta-analysis of collated data. Results. A total of seven studies were included with a total of 938 patients. The number of cases suitable for meta-analysis was 714. CES was confirmed in 73. urodynamic testing and PVR diagnosed 86 and excluded 426. The sensitivity of PVR>100ml was 64% (CI 97.5%: 0.44–0.80), specificity 59.2% (CI 97.5%: 0.46 – 0.711), while PVR >200 showed more predictive figures, with sensitivity improved to 83.1% (CI 97.5%: 0.62–0.94) and specificity to 93.5% (CI 97.5%: 0.50–0.99). Conclusions. Urodynamics test is an essential tool in CES assessment. Authors recommend PVR > 200 ml as the numerical cut-off point to be considered as a red flag that if present with other clinical red flags, urgent MRI is recommended in suspected CES

Purposes of the study and background. A Qualitative study exploring patient's experience of Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) was carried out. The aim of this study was to identify how Cauda Equina Syndrome symptoms may be more effectively identified by patients and their clinician. Patient's symptoms and experiences of their condition were explored, including issues associated with bladder, bowel and sexual function. A summary of the methods used and the results. Via in-depth questions, participants were enabled to share their stories within a confidential setting. Narrative analysis of the patient's story allowed symptom progression and recognition to be explored and language used by participants themselves to describe symptoms identified. Seven themes emerged from the study. The findings were used to develop clinical tools to assist in the consultation process of potential CES patients. Finally the tools were validated by CES patients and clinicians prior to use within a clinical setting. Conclusion. The findings of this research have been utilised, working with patients as partners, to establish clear, sensitive and understandable language to use during clinical questioning of potential CES patients. This patient choice of language for sensitive questions has been replicated on a clinical cue card to use during the consultation and on a credit card sized leaflet to give to patients. Working with patients, clear methods of communication have been developed surrounding potentially embarrassing but critical symptoms in order to assist ‘bringing the individual patient and the surgical team together at the earliest practical opportunity’. No conflicts of interest. Source of funding; Physiotherapy Research Foundation (Part of the CSP Charitable Trust registered charity 279882)

Cauda equina syndrome (CES) due to central disc prolapse produces acute neurological deficit. We investigated long-term urological disability after surgery for CES and the impact of emergency versus next day surgery. 20 CES patients (M=F), were assessed using a validated quality of life questionnaire; comparison was made with a matched group undergoing simple lumbar disc surgery. Median length of history before presentation was seven days. Nine were operated on within 4. 5 hours, the remainder all within 24 hours after neurosurgical admission. While the patients’ perception was of good general health (no different from controls), urological symptoms adversely affected their lives (P=0. 02). Only two patients had no urological symptoms. Emergency surgery (within 4. 5 hours of presentation) was not associated with reduced disability

Purpose and background:. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a rare condition which, even in the presence of prompt surgical decompression, can have devastating consequences for patients in terms of bladder and bowel dysfunction. The aim of this project was to develop a post-operative pathway for the assessment and management of bladder and bowel dysfunction in patients with CES. Method:. Beaumont Hospital performs a high volume of spinal surgeries. A small number are lumbar decompression surgeries due to CES. While sphincter function is routinely screened by a physiotherapist post-operatively, to date there has been no protocol in place for assessment and management of bladder and bowel dysfunction in this population. This project was carried out in collaboration with consultants in urology and colorectal surgery, as well as clinical nurse specialists in both areas. Results:. All patients undergoing lumbar decompression due to CES will be referred to a colorectal surgeon for post-operatively review and out-patient monitoring. A routine bladder ultrasound will be completed post-operatively to assess for urinary retention with a post void residual > 150 mls of urine indicating the need for referral to a urologist for in-patient review and out-patient follow-up. A patient education leaflet has also been developed. Conclusions:. A pathway has been implemented at Beaumont Hospital to ensure timely referral to specialised teams for both assessment and management of bladder and bowel dysfunction in CES. This pathway will ensure prompt access to specialised and supportive multi-disciplinary teams in the days/weeks/months/years post-operatively thereby minimising the emotional distress and health risks associated with secondary complications of CES

The purpose of this study is to find the clinical outcome of decompression of Cauda Equina presenting late in the course of disease. There were 33 males and 17 females with average age of 48 years, ranging from 25 to 85 years. All patients presented to us with a fully developed Cauda Equina syndrome (CES). All of them presented late with mean delay of 12.2 days. Time interval between bladder and bowel dysfunction and admission to hospital varied from 1 to 35 days. The average follow-up was 34.5 months, ranging from 12 to 60 months. There was no statistically significant difference in time of delay in surgery between the recovered and non-recovered group as tested by Student's t test. But there was a statistically significant positive correlation between duration taken for total recovery and delay in surgery. Anal wink as a predictor of bladder and bowel recovery also showed statistical significance, as patients with an absence had a poorer prognosis for bladder recovery. The result of surgery in CES is not as dramatic and fast as seen after routine disc surgery. Some improvement can be expected with decompression even in those patients presenting late and results are not universally poor as previously thought. The treating physicians of such patients should be aware that the recovery in this group of patients can take an exceptionally long time and hence should involve in constant reassurance and rehabilitation of the patient. Presence of anal wink is a very good predictor of bladder and bowel recovery

To establish the incidence of litigation in Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) and the causes of litigation. Review of 10 years of abbreviated records of the National Health Service litigation authority (NHSLA) (1997-2007) and eight years of medical negligence cases (MNC) reported on by the two senior authors (2000-2008). Patients who experienced CES and litigated. There were 117 patients in the NHSLA records and 23 patients in the MNC group. Review of timing of onset, delay in diagnosis, responsible specialist, place, and resulting symptoms. NHSLA cases. 62/117 cases were closed. The responsible specialists were as follows. Orthopaedic. 60. Accident and Emergency. 32. Other. 25. The commonest failure was delay in diagnosis, and the commonest complications were “neurological”, bladder and bowel. MNC cases. F:M;17/6. L4/5 13 cases, L5/S1 9 cases. The responsible specialist was orthopaedic (7), other (7) and in 8 cases the opinion was that there was no case to answer. Delay to treatment averaged 6.14 days. 18/23 patients described bowel and bladder symptoms, the information was not available in the remainder. Litigation is major problem in CES. In most cases orthopaedic surgeons are litigated against, and bowel and bladder symptoms remain the most disturbing cause of litigation. These surgeons are mostly not spinal specialists. In most successful cases of litigation there is considerable delay in diagnosis and management. Where there is incomplete Cauda Equina Syndrome urgent or emergency investigation and treatment is mandatory

Objective: A clear definition of cauda equina syndrome (CES) following herniated discs was not available from the literature. Some define CES as a total paralysis of the pelvic viscera. 1. while others consider any dysfunction as sufficient evidence of CES. 2. An extensive search of the literature also demonstrated a lack of a disease specific outcome measure for CES. We aimed to classify CES in the above spectrum and validate a new outcome score for CES. Design and subjects: We present a retrospective study of 38 patients with a minimum of one-year follow up who presented with an acute cauda equina syndrome. We categorized the patients as complete or incomplete and further sub-classified them as acute or chronic. A total paralysis of the pelvic viscera was considered as complete. Presence of only dysfunction of the pelvic viscera was considered as incomplete. If the presenting episode plateaued within 24 hours or less of onset it was classified as acute and if it plateaued later than 24 hours it was considered as chronic. Outcome measures: The new 17-item disease specific questionnaire was compared with the Oswestry Disability Index, SF36 and Urodynamic studies. Results and conclusion: Of the patients studied, 44.7% were complete with acute onset, 21.1% were complete with chronic onset, 10.5% were incomplete with acute onset and 23.7% were incomplete with chronic onset. Outcome score matched the spectrum of our suggested classification

Back pain affects 70% of the population in developed countries and accounts for 13% of sickness absence in the United Kingdom. 1. The clinical presentation might be taken less seriously and could result in significant morbidity and mortality. We did a retrospective observational study of patients admitted on an “acute” basis in our unit. Our aim was to identify the epidemiological proportion of patients who had significant life changing spinal conditions. 239 patients were admitted between January 2004 to December 2008 who presented with non traumatic back pain and related symptoms. The group of patients who had osteoporotic compression fractures were excluded. The mean age was 53.6 and patients were predominantly females. Disc protrusions and degenerative conditions accounted for majority of the patients. Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) and Cord compressions together contributed to 7.9% and 8.7% respectively. The mean length of stay was 10.4 days and the average wait for MRI scan was 2.4 days. Among the patients who present with back pain in the primary care setting, 3% have disc protrusions and 1% neoplastic lesions. 1. But the epidemiological distribution among the back pain admissions in the hospital setting is not very clear. Medico legal costs especially with CES are quite substantial. 2. and hence it would be useful to know the volume of patients with potential disabling lesions. Our study reveals that a significant proportion of patients who had to be admitted with back pain and especially those having red flag signs have serious spinal pathologies. Early diagnosis and timely intervention could prevent unwarranted morbidity and mortality

Purpose: Cauda Equina Syndrome (CES) is a frequently cited red flag in patients presenting with back pain and is considered a surgical emergency. The purpose of this paper is to review the current literature on CES, to establish consensus on its definition, clinical presentation and possible aetiology. Methods: The databases (Medline 1951 →, Embase 1974 →, Cinhal 1982 →) were searched using the key words Cauda Equina Syndrome and:. Definition,. Clinical presentation. Signs and Symptoms. Pathology. Aetiology. The findings from these searches were coded to identify individual aspects of CES. The consistency of each aspect was then classified using The Guidelines Development Groups format (where 100% coverage = ‘unanimity’; 75–99% = ‘consensus’; 51–74% = ‘majority view’; and 0– 50% = ‘no consensus’), and the findings summarized. Results: The electronic searches revealed 104 papers comprising case reports, case studies, literature reviews, expert opinion and papers based on clinical experience. From these, there were widely varying descriptions of the definition, clinical presentation and aetiology of CES, and no individual aspects reached 100% agreement. The individual aspect with greatest agreement was found to be bladder dysfunction. Conclusion: Cauda Equina Syndrome is considered a discrete clinical entity; however there is inconsistency within the literature as to its definition, clinical presentation and aetiology. To document its prevalence, clarity in definition is needed. Identifying this surgical emergency is paramount for all those who undertake spinal assessments