To summarise the evidence on long-term and infrequent harms following selected spinal and paraspinal injections and denervation procedures for chronic non-cancer spine pain.

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception to October 2023.

Non-randomised studies reporting on harms of selected interventional procedures administered to adults living with chronic axial or radicular non-cancer spine pain with ≥4 weeks of follow-up.

A parallel guideline panel provided input on the scope, design and interpretation of this systematic review, including selection of adverse events for consideration. Systematic literature screening, data abstraction and risk of bias appraisal were conducted independently and in duplicate by pairs of reviewers. We used random-effects models for all meta-analyses and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to evaluate the certainty of evidence.

We included 60 longitudinal studies (56 non-comparative, 4 comparative) that enrolled 4966 patients with chronic non-cancer spine-related pain. 31 studies investigated radiofrequency ablation or denervation, 22 epidural injections and 11 joint injections or nerve blocks. Low certainty evidence suggests that joint targeted steroid injection and epidural steroid injection for chronic spine pain may result in temporary altered level of consciousness (incidence: 2.1%; 95% CI 1.1% to 4.0%), joint radiofrequency nerve ablation, joint targeted steroid injection and epidural injection of local anaesthetic and steroids may result in deep infection (incidence: 0.7%; 95% CI 0.3% to 2.0%), epidural steroid injection, joint radiofrequency nerve ablation and joint targeted injection of local anaesthetic and steroids may result in dural puncture (incidence: 1.4%; 95% CI 0.5% to 4.3%), and dorsal root ganglion radiofrequency and joint radiofrequency nerve ablation with or without joint-targeted injection of steroids may result in prolonged pain or stiffness (incidence: 8.6%; 95% CI 6.3% to 11.6%). Several interventional procedures may result in metabolic complications and prolonged sensory deficits, but the supporting evidence was only very low certainty. Most complications resolved spontaneously or with conservative management.

Low certainty evidence suggests that several common interventional procedures for chronic spine pain show risk of deep infection, dural puncture, temporary altered level of consciousness and prolonged pain or stiffness. Other harms are uncertain due to very low certainty evidence, and catastrophic outcomes were not reported in the small studies that contributed to our analyses.

This study aims to investigate the lived experiences of civilians in Lahore during the 2025 India–Pakistan conflict, focusing on psychological distress, social disruption, coping mechanisms and perceptions of national response and preparedness.

The study employs an exploratory phenomenological approach.

The study has been conducted in Lahore, the capital city of Punjab, the largest by population province of Pakistan. Lahore was selected as a research site due to its historical, strategic and political significance in Indo-Pak conflicts.

Data were collected from 10 participants aged 18 or above years, who lived in Lahore between April and May 2025, and were willing to discuss personal, social or psychological experiences related to the conflict. In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted in Urdu, transcribed, and were thematically analysed using both manual and NVivo V.12 software-supported coding.

Seven inter-related themes were identified. Participants reported intense anxiety, hypervigilance and insomnia driven by hybrid warfare tactics, including misinformation, drone sightings and media sensationalism. Social life was disrupted through withdrawal from public, religious and communal activities. Coping strategies included religious faith, family cohesion, humour and expressions of national solidarity. Notably, many participants experienced psychosomatic symptoms such as palpitations, gastrointestinal distress and stress-induced fever. A prominent finding was the absence of civilian preparedness guidance, which amplified fear and uncertainty during the escalation.

The conflicts, although short lived and geographical restrained, casts a long psychological and social on civilians, marked by fear, uncertainty, social disruption and dissatisfaction with institutional preparedness. While some coping and resilience were evident, the findings highlight the need to strengthen civilian-focused public health responses during periods of conflict escalation, including mental health awareness, media literacy and community-level support within Pakistan’s emergency response frameworks.

Haematuria contributes significantly to emergency urology admissions with over 4 per 1000 annual UK emergency admissions and 10% readmitted within 30 days. However, there is limited focus on optimising inpatient pathways internationally. Existing studies highlight a substantial underlying malignancy rate (32%) in patients presenting with visible haematuria, yet many receive inconsistent care, leading to prolonged hospital stays and increased resource use. A systematic review performed by our research group found no large-scale prospective studies have been performed in this area, and little is known about current practice. This study aims to address these gaps by investigating current management practices and their impact on outcomes, with the goal of informing evidence-based guidelines and improving patient care.

The Ward AdmiSsion of Haematuria: an Observational mUlticentre sTudy is an international, multicentre prospective observational study designed to describe the management of patients with unplanned admission to hospital with haematuria under the care of the urology team. The study will use a collaborative methodology using the British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training model. This model delivers international multicentre studies by empowering trainees to lead all aspects of multi-centre clinical studies, building research skills cost-effectively while shaping the future urological consultant workforce. Data on demographics, comorbidities, management practices and outcomes will be collected using a standardised case report form and analysed using multilevel linear regression modelling. Primary outcomes include length of stay, while secondary outcomes cover hospitalisation free survival, mortality, readmission rates at 90 days and resource use. The study was launched in January 2024 and will continue follow-up data collection through December 2025. Patient and public involvement (PPI) has been integral to the study design, ensuring that outcomes reflect patient priorities and that the research addresses key areas of concern.

Ethical and regulatory approvals will be obtained as required in each participating region. In the UK, the study is classified as a service evaluation and does not require individual patient consent. Participating sites must obtain local audit department approval. Data will be collected and stored securely, ensuring patient confidentiality. Results will be disseminated through scientific conferences, peer-reviewed publications and patient advocacy groups.