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.

Aims. Patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES) require emergency imaging and surgical decompression. The severity and type of symptoms may influence the timing of imaging and surgery, and help predict the patient’s prognosis. Categories of CES attempt to group patients for management and prognostication purposes. We aimed in this study to assess the inter-rater reliability of dividing patients with CES into categories to assess whether they can be reliably applied in clinical practice and in research. Methods. A literature review was undertaken to identify published descriptions of categories of CES. A total of 100 real anonymized clinical vignettes of patients diagnosed with CES from the Understanding Cauda Equina Syndrome (UCES) study were reviewed by consultant spinal surgeons, neurosurgical registrars, and medical students. All were provided with published category definitions and asked to decide whether each patient had ‘suspected CES’; ‘early CES’; ‘incomplete CES’; or ‘CES with urinary retention’. Inter-rater agreement was assessed for all categories, for all raters, and for each group of raters using Fleiss’s kappa. Results. Each of the 100 participants were rated by four medical students, five neurosurgical registrars, and four consultant spinal surgeons. No groups achieved reasonable inter-rater agreement for any of the categories. CES with retention versus all other categories had the highest inter-rater agreement (kappa 0.34 (95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.31); minimal agreement). There was no improvement in inter-rater agreement with clinical experience. Across all categories, registrars agreed with each other most often (kappa 0.41), followed by medical students (kappa 0.39). Consultant spinal surgeons had the lowest inter-rater agreement (kappa 0.17). Conclusion. Inter-rater agreement for categorizing CES is low among clinicians who regularly manage these patients. CES categories should be used with caution in clinical practice and research studies, as groups may be heterogenous and not comparable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(9):1007–1012

Aims. The early diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is crucial for a favourable outcome. Several studies have reported the use of an ultrasound scan of the bladder as an adjunct to assess the minimum post-void residual volume of urine (mPVR). However, variable mPVR values have been proposed as a threshold without consensus on a value for predicting CES among patients with relevant symptoms and signs. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis and systematic review of the published evidence to identify a threshold mPVR value which would provide the highest diagnostic accuracy in patients in whom the diagnosis of CES is suspected. Methods. The search strategy used electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and AMED) for publications between January 1996 and November 2021. All studies that reported mPVR in patients in whom the diagnosis of CES was suspected, followed by MRI, were included. Results. A total of 2,115 studies were retrieved from the search. Seven fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These included 1,083 patients, with data available from 734 being available for meta-analysis. In 125 patients, CES was confirmed by MRI. The threshold value of mPVR reported in each study varied and could be categorized into 100 ml, 200 ml, 300 ml, and 500 ml. From the meta-analysis, 200 ml had the highest diagnostic accuracy, with 82% sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.90) and 65% specificity (95% CI 0.70 to 0.90). When compared using summative receiver operating characteristic curves, mPVR of 200 ml was superior to other values in predicting the radiological confirmation of CES. Conclusion. mPVR is a useful tool when assessing patients in whom the diagnosis of CES is suspected. Compared with other values a mPVR of 200 ml had superior sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. In a patient with a suggestive history and clinical findings, a mPVR of > 200 ml should further raise the suspicion of CES. Caution is recommended when considering the mPVR in isolation and using it as an ‘exclusion tool’, and it should only be used as an adjunct to a full clinical assessment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):487–495

The diagnostic sub-categorization of cauda equina syndrome (CES) is used to aid communication between doctors and other healthcare professionals. It is also used to determine the need for, and urgency of, MRI and surgery in these patients. A recent paper by Hoeritzauer et al (2023) in this journal examined the interobserver reliability of the widely accepted subcategories in 100 patients with cauda equina syndrome. They found that there is no useful interobserver agreement for the subcategories, even for experienced spinal surgeons. This observation is supported by the largest prospective study of the treatment of cauda equina syndrome in the UK by Woodfield et al (2023). If the accepted subcategories are unreliable, they cannot be used in the way that they are currently, and they should be revised or abandoned. This paper presents a reassessment of the diagnostic and prognostic subcategories of cauda equina syndrome in the light of this evidence, with a suggested cure based on a more inclusive synthesis of symptoms, signs, bladder ultrasound scan results, and pre-intervention urinary catheterization. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3):227–231

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

Aims. Diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome (CES) remains difficult; clinical assessment has low accuracy in reliably predicting MRI compression of the cauda equina (CE). This prospective study tests the usefulness of ultrasound bladder scans as an adjunct for diagnosing CES. Methods. A total of 260 patients with suspected CES were referred to a tertiary spinal unit over a 16-month period. All were assessed by Board-eligible spinal surgeons and had transabdominal ultrasound bladder scans for pre- and post-voiding residual (PVR) volume measurements before lumbosacral MRI. Results. The study confirms the low predictive value of ‘red flag’ symptoms and signs. Of note ‘bilateral sciatica’ had a sensitivity of 32.4%, and a positive predictive value (PPV) of only 17.2%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 88.3%. Use of a PVR volume of ≥ 200 ml was a demonstrably more accurate test for predicting cauda equina compression on subsequent MRI (p < 0.001). The PVR sensitivity was 94.1%, specificity 66.8%, PPV 29.9% and NPV 98.7%. The PVR allowed risk-stratification with 13% patients deemed ‘low-risk’ of CES. They had non-urgent MRI scans. None of the latter scans showed any cauda equina compression (p < 0.006) or individuals developed subsequent CES in the intervening period. There were considerable cost-savings associated with the above strategy. Conclusion. This is the largest reported prospective evaluation of suspected CES. Use of the PVR volume ≥ 200 ml was considerably more accurate in predicting CES. It is a useful adjunct to conventional clinical assessment and allows risk-stratification in managing suspected CES. If adopted widely it is less likely incomplete CES would be missed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):677–682

Aims. Early cases of cauda equina syndrome (CES) often present with nonspecific symptoms and signs, and it is recommended that patients undergo emergency MRI regardless of the time since presentation. This creates substantial pressure on resources, with many scans performed to rule out cauda equina rather than confirm it. We propose that compression of the cauda equina should be apparent with a limited sequence (LS) scan that takes significantly less time to perform. Methods. In all, 188 patients with suspected CES underwent a LS lumbosacral MRI between the beginning of September 2017 and the end of July 2018. These images were read by a consultant musculoskeletal radiologist. All images took place on a 3T or 1.5T MRI scanner at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Aylesbury, UK, and Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading, UK. Results. The 188 patients, all under the age of 55 years, underwent 196 LS lumbosacral MRI scans for suspected CES. Of these patients, 14 had cauda equina compression and underwent emergency decompression. No cases of CES were missed. Patients spent a mean 9.9 minutes (8 to 10) in the MRI scanner. Conclusion. Our results suggest that a LS lumbosacral MRI could be used to diagnose CES safely in patients under the age of 55 years, but that further research is needed to assess safety and efficacy of this technique before changes to existing protocols can be recommended. In addition, work is needed to assess if LS MRIs can be used throughout the spine and if alternative pathology is being considered. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):501–505

Aims. Cauda equina syndrome (CES) can be associated with chronic severe lower back pain and long-term autonomic dysfunction. This study assesses the recently defined core outcome set for CES in a cohort of patients using validated questionnaires. Methods. Between January 2005 and December 2019, 82 patients underwent surgical decompression for acute CES secondary to massive lumbar disc prolapse at our hospital. After review of their records, patients were included if they presented with the clinical and radiological features of CES, then classified as CES incomplete (CESI) or with painless urinary retention (CESR) in accordance with guidelines published by the British Association of Spinal Surgeons. Patients provided written consent and completed a series of questionnaires. Results. In total, 61 of 82 patients returned a completed survey. Their mean age at presentation was 43 years (20 to 77; SD 12.7), and the mean duration of follow-up 58.2 months (11 to 182; SD 45.3). Autonomic dysfunction was frequent: 33% of patients reported bladder dysfunction, and 10% required a urinary catheter. There was a 38% and 53% incidence of bowel and sexual dysfunction, respectively: 47% of patients reported genital numbness. A total of 67% reported significant back pain: 44% required further investigation and 10% further intervention for the management of lower back pain. Quality of life was lower than expected when corrected for age and sex. Half the patients reported moderate or worse depression, and 40% of patients of working age could no longer work due to problems attributable to CES. Urinary and faecal incontinence, catheter use, sexual dysfunction, and genital numbness were significantly more common in patients with CESR. Conclusion. This study reports the long-term outcome of patients with CES and is the first to use validated patient-reported outcome measures to assess the CES Core Outcome Set. Persistent severe back pain and on-going autonomic dysfunction were frequently reported at a mean follow-up of five years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(9):1464–1471

No previous studies have examined the physical characteristics of patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES). We compared the anthropometric features of patients who developed CES after a disc prolapse with those who did not but who had symptoms that required elective surgery. We recorded the age, gender, height, weight and body mass index (BMI) of 92 consecutive patients who underwent elective lumbar discectomy and 40 consecutive patients who underwent discectomy for CES. On univariate analysis, the mean BMI of the elective discectomy cohort (26.5 kg/m. 2. (16.6 to 41.7) was very similar to that of the age-matched national mean (27.6 kg/m. 2. , p = 1.0). However, the mean BMI of the CES cohort (31.1 kg/m. 2. (21.0 to 54.9)) was significantly higher than both that of the elective group (p < 0.001) and the age-matched national mean (p < 0.001). A similar pattern was seen with the weight of the groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, adjusted for age, gender, height, weight and BMI. Increasing BMI and weight were strongly associated with an increased risk of CES (odds ratio (OR) 1.17, p < 0.001; and OR 1.06, p <  0.001, respectively). However, increasing height was linked with a reduced risk of CES (OR 0.9, p < 0.01). The odds of developing CES were 3.7 times higher (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 7.8, p = 0.016) in the overweight and obese (as defined by the World Health Organization: BMI ≥ 25 kg/m. 2. ) than in those of ideal weight. Those with very large discs (obstructing > 75% of the spinal canal) had a larger BMI than those with small discs (obstructing < 25% of the canal; p < 0.01). We therefore conclude that increasing BMI is associated with CES

Aims

The aim of the study was to determine if there was a direct correlation between the pain and disability experienced by patients and size of their disc prolapse, measured by the disc’s cross-sectional area on T2 axial MRI scans.

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)

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 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)

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