Background. Low back pain (LBP) is a major problem across the globe and is the leading cause worldwide of years lost to disability. Self-management is considered an important component the treatment of people with non-specific LBP. However, it seems that the self-management support for people with non-specific LBP provided by physiotherapists can be improved. Moreover, the way exercise therapists (ET) address self-management in practice is unknown. Purpose. To investigate the ideas, opinions and methods used by physiotherapists and ET with regard to self-management and providing self-management support to patients with non-specific LBP. Methods. This study was a qualitative survey. An online questionnaire with open-ended questions was developed. The survey was conducted among physiotherapists and ET working in the Netherlands. Data was analysed using thematic analysis. Results. Respondents considered self-management support an important topic in physiotherapy and exercise therapy for people with non-specific LBP. In the self-management support provided by the respondents, providing information and advice were frequently mentioned. The topics included in the support given by the respondents covered a broad range of important factors. The topics frequently focused on biomechanical factors. Therapists mainly provided patient education rather than self-management support. Moreover, important self-management skills were generally not addressed sufficiently. The majority of respondents had a need with regard to self-management or providing self-management support. These needs include having more knowledge, skills and tools aimed at facilitating self-management. Conclusion. The way physiotherapists and ET address self-management in people with non-specific LBP is not optimal and should be improved. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained. Previous publication: This work was published in a scientific journal: Hutting N, Oswald W, Staal JB, Heerkens YF. Self-management support for people with non-specific low back pain: A qualitative survey among physiotherapists and exercise therapists. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2020 Dec; 50:102269. doi: 10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102269. This work was never presented at a conference

Purpose and background. Although clinical guidelines recommend that low back pain (LBP) is best managed in primary or community care, in the UK and globally, LBP accounts for around 4% of emergency department (ED) attendances. Organising and delivering healthcare to be safe, effective, and acceptable requires hearing patients’ perspectives; this study therefore aimed to explore patients’ experiences of attending the ED for LBP. Methods and results. This was a multisite qualitative interview study with 47 adults (aged 23–79 years) who, in the past six weeks, had attended one of four UK NHS emergency departments for LBP (all types and durations). Purposive sampling was used to gain variation in the recruiting site, and LBP and demographic characteristics. Data were collected using individual, semi-structured, telephone interviews (median 45mins). Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically. We identified significant variation in patients’ experiences of ED care for LBP, which we argue reflects contrasting cultures of ED care. We present three cultures, emergency screening only, ‘cynicism and neglect’, and ‘kindness’; these cultures differ in how they navigate the tension between the ED remit and patients’ perceived needs of care. We draw on Bourdieu's notions of field and habitus and professional identity theory to help explain these findings. Conclusion. Our findings suggest unwarranted variation in ED care for LBP. Implications include the need for urgent access to primary and community care and clarity about best practice managing LBP in the ED; best practice guidance and strategies to implement this should be informed by notions of culture and professional identity. No conflicts of interest.  . Sources of funding. Health Education England & National Institute of Health and Care Research (ICA-CDRF-2018-04-ST2-040)

Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire de Lille, Service de Neurochirurgie et Chirurgie du Rachis, Lille, France. Assessment of current thoughts regarding spinal fellowships amongst spinal fellows in the United Kingdom and abroad. Qualitative analysis provides rich and contextual detail that cannot be borne out by quantitative research. We undertook detailed interviews amongst fellows who have varying fellowship experience both in the United Kingdom and abroad. Ten fellows, all of whom were approaching their Certificate of Completion of Training (or equivalent) in Trauma and Orthopaedic surgery, or just awarded the certificate. All undertaking/undertaken at least one 12-month fellowship. Qualitative experiences. A large unit provides a breadth of pathology that may is usually not encountered in smaller units. Fellows who worked in such units felt confident that they would recognise a variety of pathologies, but did not necessarily feel confident in their surgical management. Operative exposure to deformity surgery, whilst not necessarily a future part of practice, was felt useful for the added technical skills it provides. Fellows attending a smaller unit, where they may have been the sole ‘spinal fellow’, reported greater satisfaction in operative experience. Interestingly, there was felt to be a ‘saturation point’, where a fellow perceived no further educational benefit from remaining in one particular unit. A fellowship in spinal surgery is useful in preparing for independent practice as a spinal surgeon. Large units provide skills that are applicable to several aspects of spinal surgery. There appears to be a difference in breadth and complexity of pathology versus operative experience

Purpose. The behavioural change wheel methodology and social cognitive theory were combined to inform and develop a rehabilitation programme following lumbar fusion surgery (REFS). This qualitative study evaluated participant's experiences of lumbar fusion surgery, including REFS, to identify valued programme content (‘active ingredients’). Background. A feasibility-RCT suggested REFS achieved a meaningful impact in disability and pain self-efficacy compared to ‘usual care’ (p=0.014, p=0.007). In keeping with MRC guidance a qualitative evaluation was undertaken to understand possible mechanisms of action. Methods. Thematic analysis was utilised on data from semi-structured, face-to-face interviews, in a purposive sample (REFS n=10, ‘usual care’ n=10). Results. Three themes (8 sub-themes) were identified, which illuminated the experiences of 1) the impact of living with a chronic lumbar disorder 2) reflections on recovery, and 3) the experience of rehabilitation with(out) REFS. REFS participants identified valued programme content including the opportunity for vicarious learning, the shared rehabilitation experience, and expert physiotherapy. They were unable to identify pre-eminent programme content, in keeping with inter-dependent ‘active ingredients’. Abstraction with the overarching theme of ‘loss of self’ was evident for analysis across all themes. Conclusion. In conclusion the findings were theoretically congruous with other published works e.g. recent mega-ethnographic review of patients experience of chronic non-malignant pain. Two emergent areas were identified to inform future REFS iterations and better understand potential mechanisms of action. 1-Participants fear of harm appears directly attributable to the instillation of metalware, this association is mediated by inadequate advice. 2-Lumbar fusion surgery is not perceived as elective. No conflicts of interest. Funding; NIHR (Doctoral fellowship, awarded to J Greenwood)

Background. Previous research in people with musculoskeletal low back pain (MLBP) in primary care shows that a reliable and valid measure of consultation-based reassurance enables testing reassurance against patient' outcomes. Little is known about the role of reassurance in people with MLBP consulting spinal surgeons, especially in cases where surgeons recommend not to have surgery. There might be several reasons to exclude surgery as a treatment option, that range from positive messages about symptoms resolving to negative messages, suggesting that all reasonable avenue of treatment have been exhausted. AIM to explore patient's experience of consultation-based reassurance in people with MLBP who have been recently advised not to have surgery. Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 low back pain patients who had recently consulted for spinal surgery and were advised that surgery is not indicated. Interview were audio recorded and transcribed, and then coded using NVIVO qualitative software and analysed using the Framework Analysis. Results. Most patients reported feeling dismissed and discouraged. They considered that consultants were better in relationship building and data gathering than in providing cognitive and generic reassurance. Major emerging themes included the complexity and confusion of their NHS journey, lack of continuity-of-care, lack of information for their condition and a sense of dismissal. Patients reported that they needed reassurance through clear explanations and discussion of pain management, but instead were discharged into a void. Conclusion. Effective communication with patients attending surgical settings to consult about their back pain is important, especially when no active treatment is being offered. No conflict of interest. Funded by a grant from EuroSpine awarded to Professor Tamar Pincus and carried out within the NHS

Objectives. To investigate the views and experiences of patients with sciatica who have undergone a bespoke physiotherapy programme whilst awaiting primary lumbar microdiscectomy. Methods. This is a qualitative study, nested within a preliminary RCT. All patients were listed for primary, single-level microdiscectomy surgery. In the experimental arm of the study 29 patients had up to 6 sessions of physiotherapy over an 8 week period while on the waiting list for lumbar microdiscectomy. After surgery, they were invited to participate in an in-depth semi-structured interview. At this time patients had either decided not to have the surgery, or had undergone surgery. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analysed. Two researchers were involved in the analysis of the data to ensure the interpretation of the findings was robust, credible and trustworhy. Results:. 21 patients were interviewed with 24 patients in the sample undergoing surgery following the physiotherapy. The physiotherapy was found to be of value with patients appreciating exercises to reduce pain and discomfort, techniques for improving properly, interventions to improve gait and posture, hands-on therapy and gym work through an individually tailored treatment approach. Another strong theme was that of perceived delays for scanning and entry into secondary care. Conclusion:. The nested qualitative study provides further evidence as to the experiences and difficulties faced by patients with sciatica. An emergent theme was the difficulty in accessing what patients perceived to be appropriate care. The bespoke, patient-orientated approach was well received by both clinicians and patients and provides opportunities for its wider introduction. This abstract presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme (Grant

Background and purpose of the study. Uncertainty remains regarding the optimal method of diagnosing sciatica. Clinical guidelines currently recommend that investigations be used only when they are likely to change management. In clinical practice, considerable variation can occur between patient and clinician, regarding the perceived importance of investigations such as MRI scans. The aim of this study was to explore patients' experiences of investigations and to consider the impact of concordance between clinical presentation and investigation findings. Methods and results. In this qualitative study, based on the principles of interpretative phenomenological analysis, 14 participants with a clinical presentation of sciatica of likely nerve root origin, who had recently undergone investigations, were purposively recruited from an NHS, Primary Care Musculoskeletal Service in the UK. Individual, semi-structured interviews were used to collect data, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were managed using a framework approach and analysed thematically. Although patients reported wanting investigations to understand the cause of symptoms and inform management, access to them was difficult and protracted. When investigations revealed potentially relevant findings, patients experienced relief, validation, empowerment and decisive decision-making. Disappointment emerged, however, regarding treatment waiting times and options, and long-term prognosis. When investigations failed to identify relevant findings, patients were unable to make sense of their symptoms, move forward in their management or relinquish their search to identify the cause. Conclusion. This study provides the first reported in-depth interpretation of patients' experience of undergoing investigations for sciatica. Important policy and practice implications have been identified for investigation referral criteria; shared-decision-making; information sharing; aligning expectations and managing disappointment. No conflicts of interest. This study was funded by an NIHR Masters in Clinical Research Fellowship awarded to CR. LR is funded, in part, by an NIHR Senior Clinical Lecturer award (Round 3)

Background and study purpose

Low mood and distress are commonly reported with by people with persistent musculoskeletal pain and may be mislabelled as ‘depression’. In order to understand how pain-related distress is conceptualised and managed in primary care consultations, we explored understanding of pain-related distress and depression from the perspectives of people with persistent musculoskeletal pain and general practitioners (GPs).

Purpose of the study and background. The biopsychosocial (BPS) model is now widely implemented in clinical practice. Most research on manual therapists' attitudes regarding psychosocial (PS) factors and NSLBP is from the physiotherapy profession. There is currently no literature available to understand how osteopaths integrate those factors with patients presenting with NSLBP. The University College of Osteopathy students being the future of the profession and receiving an accredited BPS teaching warranted the need for an investigation about their attitudes towards PS factors and NSLBP. Methods and results. A qualitative research design with elements of grounded theory was used. Nine final year UCO students were recruited and interviewed at the UCO teaching centre. Data collection and analysis occurred simultaneously through the constant comparative method of analysis. Three main themes emerged from the data analysis: 1) Definition and interpretation of PS factors towards LBP; 2) Assessment and management of PS factors; 3) Competence and difficulties towards PS factors. Conclusion. The level of understanding was homogeneous amongst the participants on the understanding of PS factors and their role in a NSLBP presentation. They assessed for PS factors throughout the case history and tend to rely on their instincts. Two types of strategies towards the PS factors management were identified. However, lack of clinical experience and lack of training on the management of PS factors were identified as the main barriers encountered by students when treating patient with NSLBP. No conflict of interest. No funding

Background. Sciatica is common and associated with significant impacts for the individual, health care and society. The SCOPiC randomised controlled trial (RCT) is investigating whether stratified primary care for sciatica is more effective and cost-effective than usual, non-stratified primary care. Stratified care involves subgrouping patients to one of three groups based on a combination of prognostic and clinical indicators. Patients in one of these groups are ‘fast-tracked’ with an MRI scan to spinal specialist opinion. Our aim was to understand the perspectives of clinicians on the acceptability of this ‘fast-track’ pathway. Methods. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with general practitioners, spinal specialist physiotherapists and spinal surgeons (n=20 in total). Interviews were fully transcribed, and data were analysed using the constant comparison method. Results. Across all groups, clinicians identified potential added value in ‘fast-tracking’ some sciatica patients in terms of patient reassurance based on MRI scan findings. Whilst spinal physiotherapists felt that most ‘fast track’ patients were appropriate, some spinal physiotherapists and GPs had concerns that patients with symptom durations of less than 6 weeks might be inappropriately fast-tracked since their symptoms may still resolve without the need for invasive treatments. Spinal surgeons felt it was acceptable for patients with short symptom durations to be ‘fast-tracked’, but to provide early reassurance rather than direct treatment. Conclusion. Whilst clinicians saw added value in a group of sciatica patients being ‘fast-tracked’ to specialist opinion, there was some reservation about moving away from the usual stepped care, ‘wait and see’ approach for patients with short symptom duration. Conflicts of interest statement. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding. This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA project number 12/201/09) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment. Funding support is also received from an NIHR Research Professorship for Nadine Foster (NIHR-RP-011-015), who is an NIHR Senior Investigator, and a HEFCE Senior Clinical Lecturer award for Kika Konstantinou. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health and Social Care. The study was approved by the NRES Committee West Midlands – Solihull, 17/03/2015, ref: 15/WM/0078. Trial registration: ISRCTN75449581

Background. Improving primary care management of musculoskeletal (MSK) pain is a priority. A pilot cluster RCT tested prognostic stratified care for patients with common MSK pain presentations, including low back pain, in 8 UK general practices (4 stratified care; 4 usual care) with 524 patients. GPs in stratified care practices were asked to use i) the Keele STarT MSK tool for risk-stratification and ii) matched treatment options for patients at low-, medium- and high-risk of persistent pain. A linked qualitative process evaluation explored patients' and GPs' views and experiences of stratified care. Methods. Individual ‘stimulated-recall’ interviews with patients and GPs in the stratified care arm (n=10 patients; 10 GPs), prompted by consultation-recordings. Data were analysed thematically and mapped onto the COM-B behaviour change model; exploring the Opportunity, Capability and Motivation GPs and patients had to engage with stratified care. Results. Patients reported positive views that stratified care enabled a more ‘structured’ consultation. GPs identified difficulties integrating the STarT MSK tool in their consultation timeframe (Opportunity), but found this easier as it became more familiar. Both groups saw the tool as having added-value, but identified ‘cumbersome’ items which made it more difficult to use (Capability). GPs reported the matched treatment options aided their clinical decision-making, identified several that were not available to them (e.g. pain-management clinics) and suggested additional options (e.g. GP-management of psychosocial issues (Motivation). Conclusion. Changes to the STarT MSK tool and matched treatment options, targeting the COM-B model constructs, were identified and have been implemented in the current main trial. Conflicts of interest statement: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Programme Grants for Applied Research scheme (grant number: RP-PG-1211-20010). The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Nadine Foster is a NIHR Senior Investigator and was supported through an NIHR Research Professorship (NIHR-RP-011-015). Trial registration: ISRCTN15366334

Background. Chronic musculoskeletal pain increases an individual's risk of developing many chronic diseases and the risk of all-cause early mortality. There is irrefutable evidence supporting the role of physical activity (PA) in reducing these risks. Sustaining changes to PA behaviours is challenging and efforts are needed to understand the barriers and facilitators of change. Understanding these factors is a vital step in developing behaviour change interventions. Objectives. Explore barriers and facilitators to engaging in PA in adults accessing pain services. Explore barriers and facilitators to promoting PA by healthcare professionals, exercise professionals and charity staff/expert patients. Methods. A qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework (TDF). Two focus groups were conducted with service users (n=18). Three focus groups were held with; healthcare professionals (n=8); exercise professionals (n=6) and charity staff/expert patients (n=8). Two independent reviewers thematically analysed transcripts. Barriers and facilitators were subsequently coded according to the domains of the TDF. Results. For all groups barriers were frequently mapped to the domain ‘environmental context and resources’. Although there was variation across the groups, barriers were also frequently mapped to the domains of ‘knowledge’, ‘beliefs about consequences’, and ‘belief about capabilities’. For service-users' facilitators were frequently mapped to ‘social influences’. Conclusion. The TDF was used to identify deficits that are likely to influence behaviours; targeted intervention strategies have been developed to specifically target these deficits. The interventions that have been developed consider not only the behaviour of those at whom the intervention is targeted, but also those involved in its delivery. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This research was funded by the Public Health Agency, HSC R&D Division through a Doctoral Fellowship awarded to J Marle

Purpose and Background

Patients with low back pain are increasing globally. Physical dysfunction and psychosocial factors such as stress, anxiety, and fear of movement, often referred to as yellow flags, play a role in the persistence of low back pain. What is not known is the extent to which yellow flags are screened for and treatment adjusted accordingly by Physiotherapists in India. The aim was to determine the current knowledge and awareness of physiotherapists in India regarding psychosocial factors for managing patients with low back pain.

Background

There is an increasing burden of LBP. Clinical guidelines promote physical activity (PA) and self-management strategies and aim to reform unhelpful clinical activity. This study explores osteopaths' beliefs about non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) and the role of activity in the treatment of NSLBP.

Background

Persistent low back and leg pain is a common and highly disabling musculoskeletal condition. Many patients seek the opinion of a neurosurgeon with a view to surgical intervention. Few data are available which document the experiences of patients at these consultations.

A statement of the purposes of the study and background:

Merely publishing clinical guidelines is insufficient to ensure their implementation in clinical practice. We aimed to clarify the decision-making processes that result in the delivery of particular treatments to patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care and to examine clinicians' perspectives on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) clinical guidelines for managing LBP in primary care.

Purposes and background. Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition with substantial associated disability and costs, best understood using a biopsychosocial approach. Research demonstrates LBP beliefs are important, with biomedical beliefs influencing practitioner's management. LBP beliefs can be inconsistent amongst medical students. The aim of this study was to investigate graduate medical student's beliefs of LBP and what influences them. Method and results. A cross sectional study of phase one and phase three students at the University of Warwick was conducted. Participants were recruited via voluntary response sampling. A survey investigated LBP beliefs, utilising the Back Beliefs Questionnaire (BBQ) and Health Care Providers’ Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Qualitative data was collected on what influences beliefs about the causes and management of LBP, which was analysed descriptively using thematic analysis. Fifty-seven students completed the questionnaire. Median BBQ and HC-PAIRS scores were consistent between both year groups. Three main themes emerged from the qualitative data: Sources of influence, influence of personal experience and influence of medical education. Participants discussed single or multiple sources influencing their beliefs. Another main theme was the influence of experiencing LBP personally or through discussions with others. The final main theme described the influence of medical education. Conclusions. Students in this sample tended to have positive beliefs about the outcome of LBP and functional expectations of chronic LBP patients. The mean BBQ and HC-PAIRS scores are comparable to studies of medical students. The findings from qualitative data suggest how medical students form beliefs about the causes and management of LBP is complex. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained. This work has not been previously published or presented at any national or international meeting

Aims. Scoliosis is a lateral curvature of the spine with associated rotation, often causing distress due to appearance. For some curves, there is good evidence to support the use of a spinal brace, worn for 20 to 24 hours a day to minimize the curve, making it as straight as possible during growth, preventing progression. Compliance can be poor due to appearance and comfort. A night-time brace, worn for eight to 12 hours, can achieve higher levels of curve correction while patients are supine, and could be preferable for patients, but evidence of efficacy is limited. This is the protocol for a randomized controlled trial of ‘full-time bracing’ versus ‘night-time bracing’ in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods. UK paediatric spine clinics will recruit 780 participants aged ten to 15 years-old with AIS, Risser stage 0, 1, or 2, and curve size (Cobb angle) 20° to 40° with apex at or below T7. Patients are randomly allocated 1:1, to either full-time or night-time bracing. A qualitative sub-study will explore communication and experiences of families in terms of bracing and research. Patient and Public Involvement & Engagement informed study design and will assist with aspects of trial delivery and dissemination. Discussion. The primary outcome is ‘treatment failure’ (Cobb angle progression to 50° or more before skeletal maturity); skeletal maturity is at Risser stage 4 in females and 5 in males, or ‘treatment success’ (Cobb angle less than 50° at skeletal maturity). The comparison is on a non-inferiority basis (non-inferiority margin 11%). Participants are followed up every six months while in brace, and at one and two years after skeletal maturity. Secondary outcomes include the Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire and measures of quality of life, psychological effects of bracing, adherence, anxiety and depression, sleep, satisfaction, and educational attainment. All data will be collected through the British Spine Registry. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(11):873–880

Background. Immersive virtual reality (VR) demonstrates potential benefits in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). However, few studies have investigated the feasibility and the acceptability of introducing immersive VR for use with patients with CLBP and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Aim. To investigate immersive VR's feasibility, tolerability, and acceptability as a rehabilitation intervention for adult patients with CLBP and explore the views of relevant Health Care Practitioners (HCPs) in the KSA. Methodology and Methods. A multi-centre, mixed-methods, explanatory sequential design was adopted to test immersive VR's feasibility, tolerability, and acceptability. An uncontrolled feasibility trial was conducted. The immersive VR intervention involved a training session followed by three sessions over one week using commercially available hardware and software. Feasibility outcomes were collected from patients immediately post-intervention. Patients and HCPs were recruited for semi-structured interviews. Results. Thirty-three patients and three HCPs were recruited. The feasibility a priori criteria were met for recruitment, retention, dropout, completeness of questionnaire data, treatment compliance and fidelity. Adverse events included one who reported aggravation of tinnitus, whereas two experienced dizziness. Qualitative data suggested that entertainment and motivation were key enablers. Barriers included technological capability and HCPs’ perceptions that immersive VR was time-consuming. Conclusion. The results suggested that immersive VR was feasible, acceptable, and tolerable among patients with CLBP and HCPs in clinical settings in the KSA. Further research focusing on the effectiveness is warranted in this field. Conflicts of Interest. None. Sources of Funding. None. Trial registration number. ISRCTN14434517

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)