Aims. Traumatic central cord syndrome (CCS) typically follows a hyperextension injury and results in motor impairment affecting the upper limbs more than the lower, with occasional sensory impairment and urinary retention. Current evidence on mortality and long-term outcomes is limited. The primary aim of this study was to assess the five-year mortality of CCS, and to determine any difference in mortality between management groups or age. Methods. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a traumatic CCS between January 2012 and December 2017 in Wales were identified. Patient demographics and data about injury, management, and outcome were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to assess mortality and between-group differences. Results. A total of 65 patients were identified (66.2% male (n = 43), mean age 63.9 years (SD 15.9)). At a minimum of five years’ follow-up, 32.3% of CCS patients (n = 21) had died, of whom six (9.2%) had died within 31 days of their injury. Overall, 69.2% of patients (n = 45) had been managed conservatively. There was no significant difference in age between conservatively and surgically managed patients (p = 0.062). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no significant difference in mortality between patients managed conservatively and those managed surgically (p = 0.819). However, there was a significant difference in mortality between the different age groups (< 50 years vs 50 to 70 years vs > 70 years; p = 0.001). At five years’ follow-up, 55.6% of the patient group aged > 70 years at time of injury had died (n = 15). Respiratory failure was the most common cause of death (n = 9; 42.9%). Conclusion. Almost one-third of patients with a traumatic CCS in Wales had died within five years of their injury. The type of management did not significantly affect mortality but their age at the time of injury did. Further work to assess the long-term functional outcomes of surviving patients is needed to generate more reliable prognostic information. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):920–927

Purposes of the study and background. Clinical assessment of spinal function is a routine part of low back pain (LBP) assessment, yet there is no clear consensus on what constitutes ‘spinal dysfunction’ and how this informs treatment. This study's aims to develop a spinal function classification framework by gaining expert academic and clinical consensus on (i) spinal function assessment tests (ii) encountered LBP motor control/movement impairment (MCI/MI) sub-types (iii) their characteristics and (iii) exercises and feedback for each sub-type. Methods and Results. An online 2-round Delphi-survey of 4 world-leading academic experts and 36 clinical physiotherapists world-wide was employed. A five-point response scale was used to rate level of agreement on 174 items with a priori consensus defined by a ≠>80% level of agreement (LOA). Out of 15 spinal function assessment tests, 5 reached consensus with forward bend and sitting/standing tests highest scoring. 7 MCI/MI sub-types reached consensus as clinically encountered. 12 out of 128 of posture/movement descriptors within the 7 sub-types reached consensus. 7 exercises gained consensus in being considered as ‘important’ or ‘very important’ with exercises involving sitting, standing, forward bend scoring highest. Consensus was reached on MCI/MI sub-type specific exercises, compensation strategies and feedback to remedy these compensations. Conclusion. Academic and clinical expert consensus derived list of movement/posture descriptors, assessment tests and exercises considered clinically important provides a first to date, spinal function assessment classification framework for non-specific LBP. This offers a conceptual model for developing technologies (e.g. wearable sensors) to harness clinically useful information relating to spinal function, exercise performance and feedback for effective implementation of exercise therapies for non-specific LBP. No conflicts of interest. Sources of Funding: Health and Care Research Wales, RCBC Postdoctoral Research Fellowship

To identify the most cited British author, unit and country within Great Britain among the scoliosis and spinal deformity literature. Using methods as described by Skovrlj (2014), a search of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science was performed using the terms ‘scoliosis’ and ‘spine deformity’ from 1900 to 2013 published from authors in the following countries: UK, England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales. Additional citations searches were performed using PubMed and Google scholar. Results were sorted according to number of citations; papers applicable to scoliosis or spinal deformity were chosen. The Top 25 citations from British authors were established. 80% of papers were published before 2000. Citation counts and therefore rankings varied for each of the three citation searches, producing differences in rank of as great as 28 for the same paper. Ruth Wynne-Davies from Edinburgh ranked number one in all three searches, followed by SG Boyd, R Dickson, and M McMaster. Half of the top ten papers were published by authors from Edinburgh. The most cited author in Great Britain from all citation searches is Ruth Wynne Davies. However, the citation count of all papers varied depending on the search platform used, producing varying ranks for all other papers

Aims

With resumption of elective spine surgery services in the UK following the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted a multicentre British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS) collaborative study to examine the complications and deaths due to COVID-19 at the recovery phase of the pandemic. The aim was to analyze the safety of elective spinal surgery during the pandemic.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed. Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1003–1005.

In our study, the aims were to describe the changes in the appearance of the lumbar spine on MRI in elite fast bowlers during a follow-up period of one year, and to determine whether these could be used to predict the presence of a stress fracture of the posterior elements. We recruited 28 elite fast bowlers with a mean age of 19 years (16 to 24) who were training and playing competitively at the start of the study. They underwent baseline MRI (season 1) and further scanning (season 2) after one year to assess the appearance of the lumbar intervertebral discs and posterior bony elements. The incidence of low back pain and the amount of playing and training time lost were also recorded.

In total, 15 of the 28 participants (53.6%) showed signs of acute bone stress on either the season 1 or season 2 MR scans and there was a strong correlation between these findings and the later development of a stress fracture (p < 0.001). The prevalence of intervertebral disc degeneration was relatively low. There was no relationship between disc degeneration on the season 1 MR scans and subsequent stress fracture. Regular lumbar MR scans of asymptomatic elite fast bowlers may be of value in detecting early changes of bone stress and may allow prompt intervention aimed at preventing a stress fracture and avoiding prolonged absence from cricket.