Independent information. England-wide.Public data. Clear sources.

NHS trusts · Havering

Barking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust

Queens Hospital, Rom Valley Way, Romford, RM7 0AG

CQC: Requires improvementActive source recordOrganisation information

What can I learn about Barking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust?

The recorded overall CQC rating is “Requires improvement”, dated 10 February 2023. These figures describe an organisation or network; check which service and location would handle your care.

UNDERSTAND YOUR OPTIONS

Care and access: the published picture

Start with the topics that matter to you. Each card explains one published measure; the date and reporting group show what it covers.

Inpatient experience across this trust

Patients’ survey responses across the trust. These can include several hospital sites.

2025 survey NHS trust

Patients’ overall hospital experience

7.6 out of 10

7.6 out of 10 was reported for “Patients’ overall hospital experience”. Adult inpatients’ reported experience, scored out of 10 and adjusted by the publisher for age, sex and admission route. Higher scores mean more positive experiences; small differences do not establish a better hospital.

Definition and source

Published measure: Overall experience

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.78.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Being treated with respect and dignity

8.6 out of 10

8.6 out of 10 was reported for “Being treated with respect and dignity”. Adult inpatients’ reported experience of respect and dignity, scored out of 10. This describes the survey group and reporting unit shown, rather than every patient’s care.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respect and dignity

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

If you brought medication with you to hospital, were you able to take it when you needed to?

7.4 out of 10

7.4 out of 10 was reported for “If you brought medication with you to hospital, were you able to take it when you needed to?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: If you brought medication with you to hospital, were you able to take it when you needed to?

Reported sample: 187.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.58.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.3 out of 10
20217.5 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20238.2 out of 10
20247.5 out of 10
20257.4 out of 10
Explore 60 additional measures

2025 survey NHS trust

Did you get enough help from staff to eat your meals?

7.4 out of 10

7.4 out of 10 was reported for “Did you get enough help from staff to eat your meals?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did you get enough help from staff to eat your meals?

Reported sample: 148.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.38.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.5 out of 10
20257.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you able to get hospital food outside of set mealtimes? This could include additional food if you missed set mealtimes due to operations/procedures or another reason.

5.9 out of 10

5.9 out of 10 was reported for “Were you able to get hospital food outside of set mealtimes? This could include additional food if you missed set mealtimes due to operations/procedures or another reason.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you able to get hospital food outside of set mealtimes? This could include additional food if you missed set mealtimes due to operations/procedures or another reason.

Reported sample: 182.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.47.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 05.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20244.6 out of 10
20255.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

During your time in hospital, did you get enough to drink?

9 out of 10

9 out of 10 was reported for “During your time in hospital, did you get enough to drink?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: During your time in hospital, did you get enough to drink?

Reported sample: 354.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 99.8 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 09.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.2 out of 10
20219.4 out of 10
20229.1 out of 10
20239.3 out of 10
20249.1 out of 10
20259 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

When you asked doctors questions, did you get answers you could understand?

8.4 out of 10

8.4 out of 10 was reported for “When you asked doctors questions, did you get answers you could understand?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: When you asked doctors questions, did you get answers you could understand?

Reported sample: 359.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.39.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.5 out of 10
20217.9 out of 10
20228.3 out of 10
20238.4 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did you have confidence and trust in the doctors treating you?

8.7 out of 10

8.7 out of 10 was reported for “Did you have confidence and trust in the doctors treating you?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did you have confidence and trust in the doctors treating you?

Reported sample: 380.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209 out of 10
20218.5 out of 10
20228.8 out of 10
20238.7 out of 10
20248.7 out of 10
20258.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

When doctors spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?

8.4 out of 10

8.4 out of 10 was reported for “When doctors spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: When doctors spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?

Reported sample: 377.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.49.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.9 out of 10
20228.3 out of 10
20238.4 out of 10
20248.3 out of 10
20258.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

When you asked nurses questions, did you get answers you could understand?

8 out of 10

8 out of 10 was reported for “When you asked nurses questions, did you get answers you could understand?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: When you asked nurses questions, did you get answers you could understand?

Reported sample: 360.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.29.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.4 out of 10
20217.8 out of 10
20228.3 out of 10
20238.3 out of 10
20248.3 out of 10
20258 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did you have confidence and trust in the nurses treating you?

8.3 out of 10

8.3 out of 10 was reported for “Did you have confidence and trust in the nurses treating you?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did you have confidence and trust in the nurses treating you?

Reported sample: 380.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Much worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.69.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.7 out of 10
20218.4 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.4 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20258.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

When nurses spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?

8.2 out of 10

8.2 out of 10 was reported for “When nurses spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: When nurses spoke about your care in front of you, were you included in the conversation?

Reported sample: 379.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.39.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.8 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.2 out of 10
20248.1 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

How did you feel about the length of time you were on the waiting list before your admission to hospital?

5.8 out of 10

5.8 out of 10 was reported for “How did you feel about the length of time you were on the waiting list before your admission to hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: How did you feel about the length of time you were on the waiting list before your admission to hospital?

Reported sample: 105.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.88.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 06.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.7 out of 10
20255.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

In your opinion, were there enough nurses on duty to care for you in hospital?

6.7 out of 10

6.7 out of 10 was reported for “In your opinion, were there enough nurses on duty to care for you in hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: In your opinion, were there enough nurses on duty to care for you in hospital?

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 78.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.6 out of 10
20216.5 out of 10
20226.8 out of 10
20237 out of 10
20246.8 out of 10
20256.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, were you told something by a member of staff that was different to what you had been told by another member of staff?

7.2 out of 10

7.2 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, were you told something by a member of staff that was different to what you had been told by another member of staff?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, were you told something by a member of staff that was different to what you had been told by another member of staff?

Reported sample: 337.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.28.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.6 out of 10
20216.7 out of 10
20227.1 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247.3 out of 10
20257.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

To what extent did staff looking after you involve you in decisions about your care and treatment?

6.9 out of 10

6.9 out of 10 was reported for “To what extent did staff looking after you involve you in decisions about your care and treatment?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: To what extent did staff looking after you involve you in decisions about your care and treatment?

Reported sample: 364.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.87.8 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.8 out of 10
20216.4 out of 10
20226.7 out of 10
20236.8 out of 10
20246.7 out of 10
20256.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

How much information about your condition or treatment was given to you?

8.6 out of 10

8.6 out of 10 was reported for “How much information about your condition or treatment was given to you?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: How much information about your condition or treatment was given to you?

Reported sample: 373.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.59.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.6 out of 10
20218.3 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.4 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did you feel able to talk to members of hospital staff about your worries and fears?

7 out of 10

7 out of 10 was reported for “Did you feel able to talk to members of hospital staff about your worries and fears?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did you feel able to talk to members of hospital staff about your worries and fears?

Reported sample: 332.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.28.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.4 out of 10
20216.4 out of 10
20227.1 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247 out of 10
20257 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you given enough privacy when being examined or treated?

9.1 out of 10

9.1 out of 10 was reported for “Were you given enough privacy when being examined or treated?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you given enough privacy when being examined or treated?

Reported sample: 368.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 9.29.8 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 09.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.3 out of 10
20219.2 out of 10
20229.1 out of 10
20239.2 out of 10
20249.1 out of 10
20259.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Do you think the hospital staff did everything they could to help control your pain?

8.2 out of 10

8.2 out of 10 was reported for “Do you think the hospital staff did everything they could to help control your pain?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Do you think the hospital staff did everything they could to help control your pain?

Reported sample: 326.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Much worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.49.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.9 out of 10
20218.1 out of 10
20228.4 out of 10
20238.3 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you able to get a member of staff to help you when you needed attention?

7.7 out of 10

7.7 out of 10 was reported for “Were you able to get a member of staff to help you when you needed attention?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you able to get a member of staff to help you when you needed attention?

Reported sample: 360.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.98.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.2 out of 10
20217.3 out of 10
20227.6 out of 10
20237.6 out of 10
20247.8 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Language needs (e.g. translation, braille)

7.4 out of 10

7.4 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Language needs (e.g. translation, braille)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Language needs (e.g. translation, braille)

Reported sample: 76.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.29.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Cultural needs (e.g. same gender staff)

6.9 out of 10

6.9 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Cultural needs (e.g. same gender staff)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Cultural needs (e.g. same gender staff)

Reported sample: 85.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 79.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Religious needs (e.g. space to pray / meditate)

7.5 out of 10

7.5 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Religious needs (e.g. space to pray / meditate)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Religious needs (e.g. space to pray / meditate)

Reported sample: 60.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.49.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Accessibility needs (e.g. mobility needs, room adaptations)

7.1 out of 10

7.1 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Accessibility needs (e.g. mobility needs, room adaptations)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Accessibility needs (e.g. mobility needs, room adaptations)

Reported sample: 136.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Much worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.69.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Dietary needs (e.g. medical, allergy, vegan)

7.9 out of 10

7.9 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Dietary needs (e.g. medical, allergy, vegan)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Dietary needs (e.g. medical, allergy, vegan)

Reported sample: 119.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.18.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Mental health needs (e.g. a quiet space, emotional support)

5 out of 10

5 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Mental health needs (e.g. a quiet space, emotional support)”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about your care and treatment, did hospital staff take into account the following individual needs? Mental health needs (e.g. a quiet space, emotional support)

Reported sample: 97.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.27.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Before being admitted onto a virtual ward, did hospital staff give you information about the risks and benefits of continuing your treatment on a virtual ward?

7.1 out of 10

7.1 out of 10 was reported for “Before being admitted onto a virtual ward, did hospital staff give you information about the risks and benefits of continuing your treatment on a virtual ward?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Before being admitted onto a virtual ward, did hospital staff give you information about the risks and benefits of continuing your treatment on a virtual ward?

Reported sample: 30.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.28.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.3 out of 10
20257.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you given enough information about the care and treatment you would receive while on a virtual ward?

7.8 out of 10

7.8 out of 10 was reported for “Were you given enough information about the care and treatment you would receive while on a virtual ward?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you given enough information about the care and treatment you would receive while on a virtual ward?

Reported sample: 31.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 68.6 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.9 out of 10
20257.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

To what extent did staff involve you in decisions about leaving the hospital?

6.4 out of 10

6.4 out of 10 was reported for “To what extent did staff involve you in decisions about leaving the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: To what extent did staff involve you in decisions about leaving the hospital?

Reported sample: 356.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.17.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.7 out of 10
20216.2 out of 10
20226.7 out of 10
20236.3 out of 10
20246.3 out of 10
20256.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

To what extent did hospital staff involve your family or carers in decisions about you leaving the hospital?

5.7 out of 10

5.7 out of 10 was reported for “To what extent did hospital staff involve your family or carers in decisions about you leaving the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: To what extent did hospital staff involve your family or carers in decisions about you leaving the hospital?

Reported sample: 277.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.26.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you would need any additional equipment in your home, or any changes to your home, after leaving the hospital?

7.9 out of 10

7.9 out of 10 was reported for “Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you would need any additional equipment in your home, or any changes to your home, after leaving the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you would need any additional equipment in your home, or any changes to your home, after leaving the hospital?

Reported sample: 153.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.59 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.4 out of 10
20217.6 out of 10
20227.8 out of 10
20238 out of 10
20247.4 out of 10
20257.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you given enough notice about when you were going to leave hospital?

6.7 out of 10

6.7 out of 10 was reported for “Were you given enough notice about when you were going to leave hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you given enough notice about when you were going to leave hospital?

Reported sample: 377.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.47.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.8 out of 10
20216.2 out of 10
20226.5 out of 10
20236.5 out of 10
20246.6 out of 10
20256.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Before you left the hospital, were you given any information about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital? This includes any verbal, written or online information.

7.6 out of 10

7.6 out of 10 was reported for “Before you left the hospital, were you given any information about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital? This includes any verbal, written or online information.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Before you left the hospital, were you given any information about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital? This includes any verbal, written or online information.

Reported sample: 355.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.28.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.5 out of 10
20217 out of 10
20227.7 out of 10
20237 out of 10
20247.6 out of 10
20257.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

To what extent did you understand the information you were given about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital?

8.8 out of 10

8.8 out of 10 was reported for “To what extent did you understand the information you were given about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: To what extent did you understand the information you were given about what you should or should not do after leaving the hospital?

Reported sample: 263.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20212025 · vertical scale 08.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20218.5 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.9 out of 10
20248.7 out of 10
20258.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Before you left the hospital, were your family or carers given the information they needed to care for you at home?

6 out of 10

6 out of 10 was reported for “Before you left the hospital, were your family or carers given the information they needed to care for you at home?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Before you left the hospital, were your family or carers given the information they needed to care for you at home?

Reported sample: 247.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.47.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Thinking about any medicine you were to take at home, were you given any of the following?

4 out of 10

4 out of 10 was reported for “Thinking about any medicine you were to take at home, were you given any of the following?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Thinking about any medicine you were to take at home, were you given any of the following?

Reported sample: 296.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 3.85.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 04.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20204.2 out of 10
20213.6 out of 10
20224 out of 10
20233.7 out of 10
20244.1 out of 10
20254 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

How would you rate the quality of information you were given, while you were on the waiting list to be admitted to hospital? This includes verbal, written or online information.

6.8 out of 10

6.8 out of 10 was reported for “How would you rate the quality of information you were given, while you were on the waiting list to be admitted to hospital? This includes verbal, written or online information.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: How would you rate the quality of information you were given, while you were on the waiting list to be admitted to hospital? This includes verbal, written or online information.

Reported sample: 106.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.98.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.6 out of 10
20256.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Before you left the hospital, did you know what would happen next with your care?

6.5 out of 10

6.5 out of 10 was reported for “Before you left the hospital, did you know what would happen next with your care?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Before you left the hospital, did you know what would happen next with your care?

Reported sample: 343.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.17.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206 out of 10
20215.3 out of 10
20226.1 out of 10
20236.2 out of 10
20246.1 out of 10
20256.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did hospital staff tell you who to contact if you were worried about your condition or treatment after you left hospital?

7 out of 10

7 out of 10 was reported for “Did hospital staff tell you who to contact if you were worried about your condition or treatment after you left hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did hospital staff tell you who to contact if you were worried about your condition or treatment after you left hospital?

Reported sample: 329.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.88.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.6 out of 10
20216.2 out of 10
20226.6 out of 10
20237 out of 10
20246.7 out of 10
20257 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you may need any further health or social care services after leaving the hospital? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.

7.3 out of 10

7.3 out of 10 was reported for “Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you may need any further health or social care services after leaving the hospital? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did hospital staff discuss with you whether you may need any further health or social care services after leaving the hospital? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.

Reported sample: 212.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.28.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.5 out of 10
20216.6 out of 10
20227.7 out of 10
20237.3 out of 10
20247.5 out of 10
20257.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

After leaving the hospital, did you get enough support from health or social care services to help you recover or manage your condition? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.

5.9 out of 10

5.9 out of 10 was reported for “After leaving the hospital, did you get enough support from health or social care services to help you recover or manage your condition? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: After leaving the hospital, did you get enough support from health or social care services to help you recover or manage your condition? Please include any services from a physiotherapist, community nurse or GP, or assistance from social services or the voluntary sector.

Reported sample: 227.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.67.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 06.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.1 out of 10
20255.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Overall, did you feel you were treated with kindness and compassion while you were in the hospital?

8.4 out of 10

8.4 out of 10 was reported for “Overall, did you feel you were treated with kindness and compassion while you were in the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Overall, did you feel you were treated with kindness and compassion while you were in the hospital?

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.69.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.6 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20258.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Overall, did you feel you were treated with respect and dignity while you were in the hospital?

8.6 out of 10

8.6 out of 10 was reported for “Overall, did you feel you were treated with respect and dignity while you were in the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Overall, did you feel you were treated with respect and dignity while you were in the hospital?

Reported sample: 371.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.8 out of 10
20218.2 out of 10
20228.8 out of 10
20238.7 out of 10
20248.6 out of 10
20258.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Overall, how was your experience while you were in the hospital? Please give your answer on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you had a very poor experience and 10 means you had a very good experience.

7.6 out of 10

7.6 out of 10 was reported for “Overall, how was your experience while you were in the hospital? Please give your answer on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you had a very poor experience and 10 means you had a very good experience.”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Overall, how was your experience while you were in the hospital? Please give your answer on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you had a very poor experience and 10 means you had a very good experience.

Reported sample: 372.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.78.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.9 out of 10
20217.4 out of 10
20227.5 out of 10
20237.8 out of 10
20247.5 out of 10
20257.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

How long do you feel you had to wait to get to a bed on a ward, after you arrived at the hospital?

5.5 out of 10

5.5 out of 10 was reported for “How long do you feel you had to wait to get to a bed on a ward, after you arrived at the hospital?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: How long do you feel you had to wait to get to a bed on a ward, after you arrived at the hospital?

Reported sample: 371.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.87.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.1 out of 10
20215.5 out of 10
20225.8 out of 10
20235.7 out of 10
20245.7 out of 10
20255.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from other patients

6.1 out of 10

6.1 out of 10 was reported for “Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from other patients”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from other patients

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.77.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 06.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20236.9 out of 10
20246.2 out of 10
20256.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from staff

7.7 out of 10

7.7 out of 10 was reported for “Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from staff”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Noise from staff

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.89.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Hospital lighting

7.7 out of 10

7.7 out of 10 was reported for “Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Hospital lighting”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Hospital lighting

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.98.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.2 out of 10
20248.2 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Room temperature

9.2 out of 10

9.2 out of 10 was reported for “Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Room temperature”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? Room temperature

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 09.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20239.1 out of 10
20248.8 out of 10
20259.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? I was not prevented from sleeping

3.5 out of 10

3.5 out of 10 was reported for “Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? I was not prevented from sleeping”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Were you ever prevented from sleeping at night by any of the following? I was not prevented from sleeping

Reported sample: 378.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 3.14.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 03.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20233.7 out of 10
20243.8 out of 10
20253.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

How clean was the hospital room or ward that you were in?

8.6 out of 10

8.6 out of 10 was reported for “How clean was the hospital room or ward that you were in?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: How clean was the hospital room or ward that you were in?

Reported sample: 377.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.59.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.8 out of 10
20218.6 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.8 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Did you get enough help from staff to wash or keep yourself clean?

7.5 out of 10

7.5 out of 10 was reported for “Did you get enough help from staff to wash or keep yourself clean?”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Did you get enough help from staff to wash or keep yourself clean?

Reported sample: 281.

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.58.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.7 out of 10
20217.2 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20237.5 out of 10
20247.2 out of 10
20257.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Admission to hospital

6.1 out of 10

6.1 out of 10 was reported for “Admission to hospital”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Admission to hospital

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.47.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Kindness and compassion

8.4 out of 10

8.4 out of 10 was reported for “Kindness and compassion”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Kindness and compassion

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.69.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

The hospital and ward

7.1 out of 10

7.1 out of 10 was reported for “The hospital and ward”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: The hospital and ward

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.18 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Basic needs

7.5 out of 10

7.5 out of 10 was reported for “Basic needs”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Basic needs

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.58.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Doctors

8.5 out of 10

8.5 out of 10 was reported for “Doctors”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Doctors

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.49.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Nurses

7.8 out of 10

7.8 out of 10 was reported for “Nurses”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Nurses

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Much worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.18.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Your care and treatment

7.8 out of 10

7.8 out of 10 was reported for “Your care and treatment”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Your care and treatment

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 88.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Individual needs

7 out of 10

7 out of 10 was reported for “Individual needs”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Individual needs

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.98.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Virtual wards

7.5 out of 10

7.5 out of 10 was reported for “Virtual wards”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Virtual wards

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.78.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Leaving hospital

6.6 out of 10

6.6 out of 10 was reported for “Leaving hospital”. Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units.

Definition and source

Published measure: Leaving hospital

Adults aged 16+ who stayed overnight, mainly discharged in November 2025; excludes maternity and psychiatric units. Scores standardised by admission route, age and sex. Higher scores indicate more positive reported experience. Published comparison bands concern most other reporting units, not a direct significance test between two selected providers. Do not rank providers or add up comparison bands. Unreported questions can reflect fewer than 30 responses; missing scores are not zero. Source reporting unit: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.57.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

For your decision Check whether a site-level survey is also available for the hospital you would attend.

Referral-to-treatment pathways

How long treatment pathways had already been waiting at the reporting date. One person can have more than one pathway.

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

68.6%

Total

68.6% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 67,654 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 67,654; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

67,654 waiting-list entries

Total

67,654 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

7,064 waiting-list entries

General Surgery Service

7,064 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Surgery Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

Explore 106 additional measures

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

4,429 waiting-list entries

Urology Service

4,429 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

4,764 waiting-list entries

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

4,764 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

5,145 waiting-list entries

Ear Nose and Throat Service

5,145 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

3,755 waiting-list entries

Ophthalmology Service

3,755 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,355 waiting-list entries

Oral Surgery Service

2,355 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Oral Surgery Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,040 waiting-list entries

Neurosurgical Service

2,040 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurosurgical Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

1 waiting-list entries

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

1 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiothoracic Surgery Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

21 waiting-list entries

General Internal Medicine Service

21 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Internal Medicine Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

4,289 waiting-list entries

Gastroenterology Service

4,289 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

4,412 waiting-list entries

Cardiology Service

4,412 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

3,058 waiting-list entries

Dermatology Service

3,058 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,384 waiting-list entries

Respiratory Medicine Service

2,384 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respiratory Medicine Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,905 waiting-list entries

Neurology Service

2,905 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

1,196 waiting-list entries

Rheumatology Service

1,196 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

845 waiting-list entries

Elderly Medicine Service

845 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Elderly Medicine Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

6,393 waiting-list entries

Gynaecology Service

6,393 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

7,660 waiting-list entries

Other - Medical Services

7,660 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Medical Services: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2 waiting-list entries

Other - Mental Health Services

2 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Mental Health Services: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

505 waiting-list entries

Other - Paediatric Services

505 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Paediatric Services: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

3,609 waiting-list entries

Other - Surgical Services

3,609 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Surgical Services: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

822 waiting-list entries

Other - Other Services

822 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Other Services: ongoing pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

54%

General Surgery Service

54% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 7,064 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Surgery Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 7,064; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

75.4%

Urology Service

75.4% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,429 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,429; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

60.1%

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

60.1% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,764 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,764; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

63.8%

Ear Nose and Throat Service

63.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 5,145 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 5,145; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

84.3%

Ophthalmology Service

84.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,755 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,755; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

80.3%

Oral Surgery Service

80.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,355 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Oral Surgery Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,355; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

71.5%

Neurosurgical Service

71.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,040 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurosurgical Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,040; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

100%

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

100% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1 eligible waiting-list entry with a known start date. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiothoracic Surgery Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

76.2%

General Internal Medicine Service

76.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 21 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Internal Medicine Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 21; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

82.8%

Gastroenterology Service

82.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,289 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,289; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

76%

Cardiology Service

76% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,412 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,412; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

60.5%

Dermatology Service

60.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,058 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,058; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

95.6%

Respiratory Medicine Service

95.6% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,384 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respiratory Medicine Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,384; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

63.3%

Neurology Service

63.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,905 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,905; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

73.2%

Rheumatology Service

73.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,196 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,196; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

94.3%

Elderly Medicine Service

94.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 845 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Elderly Medicine Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 845; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

49.1%

Gynaecology Service

49.1% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 6,393 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 6,393; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

70%

Other - Medical Services

70% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 7,660 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Medical Services: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 7,660; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

100%

Other - Mental Health Services

100% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Mental Health Services: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

93.5%

Other - Paediatric Services

93.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 505 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Paediatric Services: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 505; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

64%

Other - Surgical Services

64% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,609 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Surgical Services: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,609; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

90.2%

Other - Other Services

90.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 822 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Other Services: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 822; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Uses pathways with a known clock start date. This is elapsed waiting time, not a prediction of the remaining wait.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

3.1%

General Surgery Service

3.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 7,064 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Surgery Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 7,064; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.1%

Urology Service

0.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 4,429 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,429; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.5%

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

0.5% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 4,764 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,764; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

2.7%

Ear Nose and Throat Service

2.7% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 5,145 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 5,145; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.1%

Ophthalmology Service

0.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 3,755 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,755; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.4%

Oral Surgery Service

0.4% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2,355 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Oral Surgery Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,355; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.9%

Neurosurgical Service

0.9% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2,040 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurosurgical Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,040; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 1 eligible waiting-list entry. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiothoracic Surgery Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

General Internal Medicine Service

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 21 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Internal Medicine Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 21; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.8%

Gastroenterology Service

0.8% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 4,289 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,289; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.1%

Cardiology Service

0.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 4,412 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,412; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.3%

Dermatology Service

0.3% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 3,058 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,058; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Respiratory Medicine Service

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2,384 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respiratory Medicine Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,384; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0.2%

Neurology Service

0.2% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2,905 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,905; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Rheumatology Service

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 1,196 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,196; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Elderly Medicine Service

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 845 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Elderly Medicine Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 845; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

6.8%

Gynaecology Service

6.8% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 6,393 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 6,393; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

1.8%

Total

1.8% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 67,654 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 67,654; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

3.8%

Other - Medical Services

3.8% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 7,660 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Medical Services: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 7,660; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Mental Health Services

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Mental Health Services: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Paediatric Services

0% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 505 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Paediatric Services: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 505; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

1.2%

Other - Surgical Services

1.2% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 3,609 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Surgical Services: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,609; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

1%

Other - Other Services

1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 822 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Other Services: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 822; see the source for the eligible group.

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

General Surgery Service: completed admitted pathways

285 pathways

General Surgery Service

285 pathways was reported for “General Surgery Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Surgery Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

General Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

778 pathways

General Surgery Service

778 pathways was reported for “General Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Urology Service: completed admitted pathways

169 pathways

Urology Service

169 pathways was reported for “Urology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Urology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

730 pathways

Urology Service

730 pathways was reported for “Urology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed admitted pathways

221 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

221 pathways was reported for “Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed non-admitted pathways

648 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

648 pathways was reported for “Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Trauma and Orthopaedic Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed admitted pathways

195 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

195 pathways was reported for “Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed non-admitted pathways

985 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

985 pathways was reported for “Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Ophthalmology Service: completed admitted pathways

198 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

198 pathways was reported for “Ophthalmology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Ophthalmology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

773 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

773 pathways was reported for “Ophthalmology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Oral Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

1 pathways

Oral Surgery Service

1 pathways was reported for “Oral Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Oral Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Neurosurgical Service: completed admitted pathways

59 pathways

Neurosurgical Service

59 pathways was reported for “Neurosurgical Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurosurgical Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Neurosurgical Service: completed non-admitted pathways

478 pathways

Neurosurgical Service

478 pathways was reported for “Neurosurgical Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurosurgical Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

General Internal Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

1 pathways

General Internal Medicine Service

1 pathways was reported for “General Internal Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: General Internal Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Gastroenterology Service: completed admitted pathways

558 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

558 pathways was reported for “Gastroenterology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Gastroenterology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

605 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

605 pathways was reported for “Gastroenterology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cardiology Service: completed admitted pathways

32 pathways

Cardiology Service

32 pathways was reported for “Cardiology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cardiology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

729 pathways

Cardiology Service

729 pathways was reported for “Cardiology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Dermatology Service: completed admitted pathways

227 pathways

Dermatology Service

227 pathways was reported for “Dermatology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Dermatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

743 pathways

Dermatology Service

743 pathways was reported for “Dermatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Respiratory Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways

31 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

31 pathways was reported for “Respiratory Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respiratory Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Respiratory Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

918 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

918 pathways was reported for “Respiratory Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Respiratory Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Neurology Service: completed admitted pathways

6 pathways

Neurology Service

6 pathways was reported for “Neurology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Neurology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

447 pathways

Neurology Service

447 pathways was reported for “Neurology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Rheumatology Service: completed admitted pathways

1 pathways

Rheumatology Service

1 pathways was reported for “Rheumatology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Rheumatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

145 pathways

Rheumatology Service

145 pathways was reported for “Rheumatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Elderly Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways

59 pathways

Elderly Medicine Service

59 pathways was reported for “Elderly Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Elderly Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Elderly Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

251 pathways

Elderly Medicine Service

251 pathways was reported for “Elderly Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Elderly Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Gynaecology Service: completed admitted pathways

200 pathways

Gynaecology Service

200 pathways was reported for “Gynaecology Service: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Gynaecology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

425 pathways

Gynaecology Service

425 pathways was reported for “Gynaecology Service: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Total: completed admitted pathways

2,895 pathways

Total

2,895 pathways was reported for “Total: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Total: completed non-admitted pathways

12,166 pathways

Total

12,166 pathways was reported for “Total: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Medical Services: completed admitted pathways

120 pathways

Other - Medical Services

120 pathways was reported for “Other - Medical Services: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Medical Services: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Medical Services: completed non-admitted pathways

1,377 pathways

Other - Medical Services

1,377 pathways was reported for “Other - Medical Services: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Medical Services: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Mental Health Services: completed non-admitted pathways

1 pathways

Other - Mental Health Services

1 pathways was reported for “Other - Mental Health Services: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Mental Health Services: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Paediatric Services: completed non-admitted pathways

187 pathways

Other - Paediatric Services

187 pathways was reported for “Other - Paediatric Services: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Paediatric Services: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Surgical Services: completed admitted pathways

492 pathways

Other - Surgical Services

492 pathways was reported for “Other - Surgical Services: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Surgical Services: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Surgical Services: completed non-admitted pathways

1,595 pathways

Other - Surgical Services

1,595 pathways was reported for “Other - Surgical Services: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Surgical Services: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Other Services: completed admitted pathways

42 pathways

Other - Other Services

42 pathways was reported for “Other - Other Services: completed admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Other Services: completed admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Other Services: completed non-admitted pathways

349 pathways

Other - Other Services

349 pathways was reported for “Other - Other Services: completed non-admitted pathways”. Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners.

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Other Services: completed non-admitted pathways

Provider-level NHS RTT pathways aggregated across commissioners. A person can have multiple pathways. Specialty figures do not identify the wait for a particular procedure or hospital site. Completed admitted and non-admitted pathways describe different cohorts.

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

For your decision Ask which specialty and hospital site will handle your referral, and about your own expected wait.

Diagnostic tests and waiting lists

Historical diagnostic waiting lists and completed test activity describe different groups.

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

380 waiting-list entries

380 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

721 waiting-list entries

721 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: COLONOSCOPY: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

3,922 waiting-list entries

3,922 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: CT: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

Explore 39 additional measures

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

140 waiting-list entries

140 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: CYSTOSCOPY: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

622 waiting-list entries

622 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: DEXA_SCAN: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

502 waiting-list entries

502 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

149 waiting-list entries

149 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

624 waiting-list entries

624 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: GASTROSCOPY: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

7,838 waiting-list entries

7,838 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRI: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

8,189 waiting-list entries

8,189 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

119 waiting-list entries

119 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: PERIPHERAL_NEUROPHYS: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

91 waiting-list entries

91 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

23,380 waiting-list entries

23,380 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: TOTAL: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

83 waiting-list entries

83 test waiting-list records were reported at the end of July 2026. A person can be waiting for more than one test.

Definition and source

Published measure: URODYNAMICS: patients on the reported waiting list

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

9.5%

9.5% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 380 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 380; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

2.5%

2.5% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 721 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: COLONOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 721; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

28.2%

28.2% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 3,922 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: CT: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,922; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

45%

45% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 140 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: CYSTOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 140; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

20.3%

20.3% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 622 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: DEXA_SCAN: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 622; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

0.8%

0.8% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 502 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 502; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

1.3%

1.3% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 149 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 149; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

1.8%

1.8% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 624 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: GASTROSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 624; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

45.9%

45.9% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 7,838 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRI: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 7,838; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

53.1%

53.1% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 8,189 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 8,189; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

0%

0% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 119 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: PERIPHERAL_NEUROPHYS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 119; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

8.8%

8.8% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 91 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 91; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

39.9%

39.9% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 23,380 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: TOTAL: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 23,380; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

28.9%

28.9% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 83 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: URODYNAMICS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 83; see the source for the eligible group.

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

844 tests

844 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

513 tests

513 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: COLONOSCOPY: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

9,542 tests

9,542 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: CT: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

198 tests

198 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: CYSTOSCOPY: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

381 tests

381 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: DEXA_SCAN: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

1,584 tests

1,584 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

122 tests

122 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

420 tests

420 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: GASTROSCOPY: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

5,269 tests

5,269 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRI: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

9,059 tests

9,059 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

144 tests

144 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: PERIPHERAL_NEUROPHYS: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

110 tests

110 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

28,266 tests

28,266 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: TOTAL: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

80 tests

80 tests was reported for “Tests recorded during the month”. Reported tests carried out during the month, including planned and unscheduled work. This is different from the number still waiting.

Definition and source

Published measure: URODYNAMICS: reported diagnostic activity

Diagnostic waiting list and activity at reporting-provider level. Planned and unscheduled activity are separate from the waiting-list cohort. Not a live booking estimate.

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

For your decision Confirm the test, referral route and site before comparing providers.

Cancer waiting-time standards

Published performance against specific cancer pathway standards, with separate patient groups.

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer faster diagnosis within 28 days

80.2%

80.2% was reported for “Cancer faster diagnosis within 28 days”. July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer faster diagnosis within 28 days

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,065; see the source for the eligible group.

July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics. The cancer standards have distinct eligibility, start points and cohorts; they cannot be combined into an overall score.

Cancer waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat

98.8%

98.8% was reported for “Cancer treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat”. July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat

The calculation uses a denominator of 411; see the source for the eligible group.

July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics. The cancer standards have distinct eligibility, start points and cohorts; they cannot be combined into an overall score.

Cancer waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer treatment within the combined 62-day standard

74.7%

74.7% was reported for “Cancer treatment within the combined 62-day standard”. July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer treatment within the combined 62-day standard

The calculation uses a denominator of 249; see the source for the eligible group.

July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics. The cancer standards have distinct eligibility, start points and cohorts; they cannot be combined into an overall score.

Cancer waiting times · Coverage and method

For your decision Your clinical team can explain the next step and timescale for your own referral.

Patient-reported hip and knee outcomes

Patient-reported change after hip or knee replacement, adjusted by the publisher for the specified cohort.

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

Explore 159 additional measures

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

68 pairs

68 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

81 pairs

81 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

8 pairs

8 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 81.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

14.1 EQ VAS points

14.1 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

74.9 EQ VAS points

74.9 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

72.7 EQ VAS points

72.7 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

57.8 EQ VAS points

57.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

14.9 EQ VAS points

14.9 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

45 pairs

45 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

69 pairs

69 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

3 pairs

3 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

21 pairs

21 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 69.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

20.4 Oxford Hip Score points

20.4 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

37.9 Oxford Hip Score points

37.9 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

36 Oxford Hip Score points

36 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

15.3 Oxford Hip Score points

15.3 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

20.7 Oxford Hip Score points

20.7 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

86 pairs

86 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

89 pairs

89 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

2 pairs

2 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 89.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.6 EQ-5D Index points

0.6 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

76.3 EQ VAS points

76.3 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

57.8 EQ VAS points

57.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

18.5 EQ VAS points

18.5 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

3 pairs

3 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

40.8 Oxford Hip Score points

40.8 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

7.5 Oxford Hip Score points

7.5 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

33.3 Oxford Hip Score points

33.3 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 4.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.6 EQ-5D Index points

0.6 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

73 pairs

73 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

102 pairs

102 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

8 pairs

8 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

21 pairs

21 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 102.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

2.9 EQ VAS points

2.9 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

68 EQ VAS points

68 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

63.7 EQ VAS points

63.7 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

58 EQ VAS points

58 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

5.7 EQ VAS points

5.7 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

50 pairs

50 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

90 pairs

90 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

35 pairs

35 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 90.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

15.1 Oxford Knee Score points

15.1 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

34.5 Oxford Knee Score points

34.5 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

31.9 Oxford Knee Score points

31.9 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

16.5 Oxford Knee Score points

16.5 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

15.5 Oxford Knee Score points

15.5 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

96 pairs

96 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

109 pairs

109 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

13 pairs

13 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 109.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.6 EQ-5D Index points

0.6 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

6 pairs

6 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

72.4 EQ VAS points

72.4 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

58 EQ VAS points

58 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

14.4 EQ VAS points

14.4 EQ VAS points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

4 pairs

4 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 5.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

30.7 Oxford Knee Score points

30.7 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

19.8 Oxford Knee Score points

19.8 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

10.8 Oxford Knee Score points

10.8 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

6 pairs

6 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 6.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

72 pairs

72 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

86 pairs

86 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

9 pairs

9 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 86.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

14.8 EQ VAS points

14.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

75.7 EQ VAS points

75.7 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

72.9 EQ VAS points

72.9 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

57.8 EQ VAS points

57.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

15.1 EQ VAS points

15.1 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

48 pairs

48 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

73 pairs

73 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

3 pairs

3 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

22 pairs

22 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 73.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

20.5 Oxford Hip Score points

20.5 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

38.1 Oxford Hip Score points

38.1 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

36.2 Oxford Hip Score points

36.2 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

14.9 Oxford Hip Score points

14.9 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

21.2 Oxford Hip Score points

21.2 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

90 pairs

90 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

93 pairs

93 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

1 pairs

1 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

2 pairs

2 pairs was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 93.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.6 EQ-5D Index points

0.6 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.3 EQ-5D Index points

0.3 EQ-5D Index points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

77 pairs

77 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

108 pairs

108 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

9 pairs

9 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

22 pairs

22 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 108.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

3.9 EQ VAS points

3.9 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

68.8 EQ VAS points

68.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

64.1 EQ VAS points

64.1 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

58 EQ VAS points

58 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

6.1 EQ VAS points

6.1 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

54 pairs

54 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

95 pairs

95 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

5 pairs

5 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

36 pairs

36 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 95.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

15.1 Oxford Knee Score points

15.1 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

34.3 Oxford Knee Score points

34.3 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

31.9 Oxford Knee Score points

31.9 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

16.6 Oxford Knee Score points

16.6 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

15.2 Oxford Knee Score points

15.2 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

101 pairs

101 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

115 pairs

115 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

0 pairs

0 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with unchanged score

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

14 pairs

14 pairs was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

Reported sample: 115.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RF4. 3. The participation rate for this supplier may be affected by a change in supplier, please see the "Accredited Supplier Switchover" note on the Title Sheet for more details.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures: hip and knee replacement · Coverage and method

For your decision Compare the same operation and cohort. Your clinician can discuss what an outcome might mean for you.

Hospital trends

Each measure retains its own reporting period. A&E reporting uses a changed footprint from April 2026; earlier points are excluded from our A&E trends.

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

A&E 12 hour performance

14.5%

14.5% was reported for “A&E 12 hour performance”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: A&E 12 hour performance

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported. A&E footprint methodology changed from April 2026; earlier points are excluded from this comparison.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2026-042026-07 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2026-0413.8%
2026-0513.4%
2026-0615%
2026-0714.5%

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

A&E 4 hour performance

83.8%

83.8% was reported for “A&E 4 hour performance”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: A&E 4 hour performance

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported. A&E footprint methodology changed from April 2026; earlier points are excluded from this comparison.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2026-042026-07 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2026-0483.5%
2026-0583.7%
2026-0683.2%
2026-0783.8%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 31 Day Treatment Standard

98.9%

98.9% was reported for “Cancer 31 Day Treatment Standard”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer 31 Day Treatment Standard

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0699.1%
2025-0797.3%
2025-0897.7%
2025-0998.5%
2025-1097.7%
2025-1198.4%
2025-1298.7%
2026-0197.8%
2026-0299%
2026-0398.1%
2026-0494.4%
2026-0596.4%
2026-0698.9%
Explore 5 additional measures

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 62 Day Combined Performance

72.3%

72.3% was reported for “Cancer 62 Day Combined Performance”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer 62 Day Combined Performance

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0673.2%
2025-0772.2%
2025-0877.2%
2025-0972.3%
2025-1073.9%
2025-1170.3%
2025-1268.7%
2026-0161.6%
2026-0263.6%
2026-0366.4%
2026-0467%
2026-0566.4%
2026-0672.3%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer Faster Diagnostic Standard

77%

77% was reported for “Cancer Faster Diagnostic Standard”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer Faster Diagnostic Standard

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0679.1%
2025-0778.6%
2025-0878.7%
2025-0979.3%
2025-1078.5%
2025-1178.8%
2025-1270.7%
2026-0168.7%
2026-0270.4%
2026-0370.3%
2026-0470.5%
2026-0572.7%
2026-0677%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Diagnostics proportion waiting over 6 weeks

48.1%

48.1% was reported for “Diagnostics proportion waiting over 6 weeks”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Diagnostics proportion waiting over 6 weeks

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-064.3%
2025-075%
2025-084.2%
2025-092.6%
2025-104%
2025-11Not reported
2025-12Not reported
2026-01Not reported
2026-02Not reported
2026-03Not reported
2026-0452.6%
2026-0551.3%
2026-0648.1%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Percentage waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment

1.5%

1.5% was reported for “Percentage waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Percentage waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-060.9%
2025-071%
2025-081%
2025-090.9%
2025-101%
2025-111%
2025-121.1%
2026-011.1%
2026-021.2%
2026-031.3%
2026-041.3%
2026-051.3%
2026-061.5%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Percentage waiting within 18 weeks for elective treatment

68.7%

68.7% was reported for “Percentage waiting within 18 weeks for elective treatment”. NHS England acute-provider table.

Definition and source

Published measure: Percentage waiting within 18 weeks for elective treatment

NHS England acute-provider table. Each measure retains its own reporting month. Site attribution is not supported.

Acute provider table and time series · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0100%. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0670.3%
2025-0771.2%
2025-0871.6%
2025-0973.5%
2025-1070.7%
2025-1170.7%
2025-1266.7%
2026-0164.9%
2026-0264.3%
2026-0366%
2026-0468%
2026-0568.3%
2026-0668.7%

Hospital and community workforce

Reported staff capacity across the organisation and its services.

June 2026 reporting organisation

All staff groups: Full-time equivalent

8,072 FTE

8,072 FTE was reported for “All staff groups: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: All staff groups: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 08,276.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-068,230.4 FTE
2025-078,218.1 FTE
2025-088,223.1 FTE
2025-098,241.4 FTE
2025-108,276.4 FTE
2025-118,276.6 FTE
2025-128,243.7 FTE
2026-018,135.4 FTE
2026-028,147.5 FTE
2026-038,151.5 FTE
2026-048,124.7 FTE
2026-058,115.4 FTE
2026-068,072 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

All staff groups: Headcount

8,729 staff

8,729 staff was reported for “All staff groups: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: All staff groups: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 08,941. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-068,885 staff
2025-078,875 staff
2025-088,881 staff
2025-098,903 staff
2025-108,941 staff
2025-118,935 staff
2025-128,900 staff
2026-018,793 staff
2026-028,805 staff
2026-038,807 staff
2026-048,790 staff
2026-058,777 staff
2026-068,729 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Full-time equivalent

524.4 FTE

524.4 FTE was reported for “NHS infrastructure support: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: NHS infrastructure support: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0692.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06692.2 FTE
2025-07684.9 FTE
2025-08675.6 FTE
2025-09675.2 FTE
2025-10665.9 FTE
2025-11659 FTE
2025-12636.7 FTE
2026-01561.8 FTE
2026-02553.4 FTE
2026-03551 FTE
2026-04538.8 FTE
2026-05530.4 FTE
2026-06524.4 FTE
Explore 45 additional measures

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Headcount

544 staff

544 staff was reported for “NHS infrastructure support: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: NHS infrastructure support: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0716. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06716 staff
2025-07709 staff
2025-08699 staff
2025-09699 staff
2025-10689 staff
2025-11681 staff
2025-12658 staff
2026-01582 staff
2026-02573 staff
2026-03571 staff
2026-04559 staff
2026-05550 staff
2026-06544 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Full-time equivalent

386.5 FTE

386.5 FTE was reported for “Central functions: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Central functions: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0524.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06524.2 FTE
2025-07518.7 FTE
2025-08509.4 FTE
2025-09506 FTE
2025-10496.7 FTE
2025-11491.5 FTE
2025-12471.4 FTE
2026-01418.5 FTE
2026-02412.2 FTE
2026-03409.8 FTE
2026-04396.1 FTE
2026-05391.5 FTE
2026-06386.5 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Headcount

404 staff

404 staff was reported for “Central functions: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Central functions: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0546. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06546 staff
2025-07541 staff
2025-08531 staff
2025-09528 staff
2025-10518 staff
2025-11512 staff
2025-12491 staff
2026-01437 staff
2026-02430 staff
2026-03428 staff
2026-04414 staff
2026-05409 staff
2026-06404 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent

19.2 FTE

19.2 FTE was reported for “Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 022.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0621.2 FTE
2025-0720.2 FTE
2025-0820.2 FTE
2025-0922.2 FTE
2025-1020.2 FTE
2025-1121.2 FTE
2025-1221.2 FTE
2026-0120.2 FTE
2026-0220.2 FTE
2026-0320.2 FTE
2026-0419.2 FTE
2026-0519.2 FTE
2026-0619.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Headcount

20 staff

20 staff was reported for “Hotel, property & estates: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hotel, property & estates: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 023. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0622 staff
2025-0721 staff
2025-0821 staff
2025-0923 staff
2025-1021 staff
2025-1122 staff
2025-1222 staff
2026-0121 staff
2026-0221 staff
2026-0321 staff
2026-0420 staff
2026-0520 staff
2026-0620 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Full-time equivalent

80.4 FTE

80.4 FTE was reported for “Managers: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Managers: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0108.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06102.9 FTE
2025-07102.1 FTE
2025-08102.1 FTE
2025-09106.1 FTE
2025-10108.1 FTE
2025-11106.4 FTE
2025-12104.3 FTE
2026-0186.3 FTE
2026-0285.1 FTE
2026-0385.1 FTE
2026-0485.2 FTE
2026-0582.4 FTE
2026-0680.4 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Headcount

81 staff

81 staff was reported for “Managers: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Managers: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0109. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06104 staff
2025-07103 staff
2025-08103 staff
2025-09107 staff
2025-10109 staff
2025-11107 staff
2025-12105 staff
2026-0187 staff
2026-0286 staff
2026-0386 staff
2026-0486 staff
2026-0583 staff
2026-0681 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Full-time equivalent

38.3 FTE

38.3 FTE was reported for “Senior managers: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Senior managers: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 043.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0643.9 FTE
2025-0743.9 FTE
2025-0843.9 FTE
2025-0940.9 FTE
2025-1040.9 FTE
2025-1139.9 FTE
2025-1239.9 FTE
2026-0136.9 FTE
2026-0235.9 FTE
2026-0335.9 FTE
2026-0438.3 FTE
2026-0537.3 FTE
2026-0638.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Headcount

39 staff

39 staff was reported for “Senior managers: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Senior managers: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 044. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0644 staff
2025-0744 staff
2025-0844 staff
2025-0941 staff
2025-1041 staff
2025-1140 staff
2025-1240 staff
2026-0137 staff
2026-0236 staff
2026-0336 staff
2026-0439 staff
2026-0538 staff
2026-0639 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

5,079 FTE

5,079 FTE was reported for “Professionally qualified clinical staff: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Professionally qualified clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 05,105.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-065,000.4 FTE
2025-074,983.1 FTE
2025-085,001.7 FTE
2025-095,021.8 FTE
2025-105,073.1 FTE
2025-115,100.8 FTE
2025-125,088.3 FTE
2026-015,090.4 FTE
2026-025,105.2 FTE
2026-035,101.2 FTE
2026-045,100.1 FTE
2026-055,096 FTE
2026-065,079 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Headcount

5,455 staff

5,455 staff was reported for “Professionally qualified clinical staff: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Professionally qualified clinical staff: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 05,480. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-065,360 staff
2025-075,342 staff
2025-085,362 staff
2025-095,387 staff
2025-105,443 staff
2025-115,468 staff
2025-125,453 staff
2026-015,458 staff
2026-025,476 staff
2026-035,470 staff
2026-045,480 staff
2026-055,473 staff
2026-065,455 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Full-time equivalent

1 FTE

1 FTE was reported for “Ambulance staff: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ambulance staff: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061 FTE
2025-071 FTE
2025-081 FTE
2025-091 FTE
2025-101 FTE
2025-111 FTE
2025-121 FTE
2026-011 FTE
2026-021 FTE
2026-031 FTE
2026-041 FTE
2026-051 FTE
2026-061 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Headcount

1 staff

1 staff was reported for “Ambulance staff: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ambulance staff: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061 staff
2025-071 staff
2025-081 staff
2025-091 staff
2025-101 staff
2025-111 staff
2025-121 staff
2026-011 staff
2026-021 staff
2026-031 staff
2026-041 staff
2026-051 staff
2026-061 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Full-time equivalent

1,372.9 FTE

1,372.9 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - All grades: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - All grades: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,393.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,340.3 FTE
2025-071,325 FTE
2025-081,355.7 FTE
2025-091,357 FTE
2025-101,373.6 FTE
2025-111,390.5 FTE
2025-121,393.6 FTE
2026-011,391.2 FTE
2026-021,383.6 FTE
2026-031,382.2 FTE
2026-041,389.7 FTE
2026-051,380.9 FTE
2026-061,372.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Headcount

1,446 staff

1,446 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - All grades: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - All grades: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,466. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,409 staff
2025-071,393 staff
2025-081,425 staff
2025-091,427 staff
2025-101,446 staff
2025-111,464 staff
2025-121,466 staff
2026-011,462 staff
2026-021,456 staff
2026-031,454 staff
2026-041,464 staff
2026-051,455 staff
2026-061,446 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Full-time equivalent

25.9 FTE

25.9 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 027.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0626.1 FTE
2025-0727.1 FTE
2025-0827.6 FTE
2025-0927.6 FTE
2025-1027.6 FTE
2025-1127.5 FTE
2025-1227.4 FTE
2026-0127 FTE
2026-0225 FTE
2026-0326 FTE
2026-0426 FTE
2026-0525.9 FTE
2026-0625.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Headcount

27 staff

27 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 028. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0627 staff
2025-0728 staff
2025-0828 staff
2025-0928 staff
2025-1028 staff
2025-1128 staff
2025-1228 staff
2026-0128 staff
2026-0226 staff
2026-0327 staff
2026-0427 staff
2026-0527 staff
2026-0627 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Full-time equivalent

489 FTE

489 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Consultant: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Consultant: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0497.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06484.5 FTE
2025-07482.7 FTE
2025-08485.1 FTE
2025-09489.1 FTE
2025-10490.6 FTE
2025-11496.2 FTE
2025-12497.5 FTE
2026-01493.9 FTE
2026-02493.6 FTE
2026-03489.6 FTE
2026-04494 FTE
2026-05491.2 FTE
2026-06489 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Headcount

530 staff

530 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Consultant: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Consultant: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0540. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06526 staff
2025-07523 staff
2025-08526 staff
2025-09531 staff
2025-10534 staff
2025-11539 staff
2025-12540 staff
2026-01535 staff
2026-02535 staff
2026-03530 staff
2026-04535 staff
2026-05533 staff
2026-06530 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Full-time equivalent

309.7 FTE

309.7 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Core Training: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Core Training: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0317.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06302.5 FTE
2025-07291.2 FTE
2025-08289.3 FTE
2025-09296.3 FTE
2025-10306.4 FTE
2025-11311.2 FTE
2025-12312.4 FTE
2026-01310.4 FTE
2026-02309.7 FTE
2026-03313.3 FTE
2026-04317.9 FTE
2026-05317 FTE
2026-06309.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Headcount

315 staff

315 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Core Training: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Core Training: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0324. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06306 staff
2025-07295 staff
2025-08294 staff
2025-09301 staff
2025-10311 staff
2025-11316 staff
2025-12317 staff
2026-01315 staff
2026-02315 staff
2026-03319 staff
2026-04324 staff
2026-05323 staff
2026-06315 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Full-time equivalent

65 FTE

65 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 067. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0662 FTE
2025-0762 FTE
2025-0867 FTE
2025-0967 FTE
2025-1067 FTE
2025-1166 FTE
2025-1267 FTE
2026-0166 FTE
2026-0266 FTE
2026-0366 FTE
2026-0466 FTE
2026-0566 FTE
2026-0665 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Headcount

65 staff

65 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 067. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0662 staff
2025-0762 staff
2025-0867 staff
2025-0967 staff
2025-1067 staff
2025-1166 staff
2025-1267 staff
2026-0166 staff
2026-0266 staff
2026-0366 staff
2026-0466 staff
2026-0566 staff
2026-0665 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Full-time equivalent

80.6 FTE

80.6 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 083.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0676.7 FTE
2025-0773.1 FTE
2025-0879.3 FTE
2025-0976.6 FTE
2025-1071.8 FTE
2025-1178.3 FTE
2025-1279.7 FTE
2026-0182.7 FTE
2026-0283.1 FTE
2026-0381.5 FTE
2026-0482.6 FTE
2026-0579 FTE
2026-0680.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Headcount

83 staff

83 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 085. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0679 staff
2025-0775 staff
2025-0882 staff
2025-0979 staff
2025-1074 staff
2025-1181 staff
2025-1282 staff
2026-0185 staff
2026-0285 staff
2026-0383 staff
2026-0485 staff
2026-0581 staff
2026-0683 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Full-time equivalent

0.2 FTE

0.2 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-060.8 FTE
2025-070.8 FTE
2025-080.8 FTE
2025-090.8 FTE
2025-100.8 FTE
2025-110.8 FTE
2025-120.8 FTE
2026-010.5 FTE
2026-020.5 FTE
2026-030.4 FTE
2026-040.4 FTE
2026-050.2 FTE
2026-060.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Headcount

1 staff

1 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 04. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-064 staff
2025-074 staff
2025-084 staff
2025-094 staff
2025-104 staff
2025-114 staff
2025-124 staff
2026-013 staff
2026-023 staff
2026-032 staff
2026-042 staff
2026-051 staff
2026-061 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Full-time equivalent

109.8 FTE

109.8 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0112. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06104.9 FTE
2025-07105.6 FTE
2025-08106.6 FTE
2025-09105.4 FTE
2025-10106.4 FTE
2025-11107.2 FTE
2025-12109.4 FTE
2026-01112 FTE
2026-02110.8 FTE
2026-03111.5 FTE
2026-04110.9 FTE
2026-05108.8 FTE
2026-06109.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Headcount

118 staff

118 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0119. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06109 staff
2025-07111 staff
2025-08112 staff
2025-09111 staff
2025-10112 staff
2025-11113 staff
2025-12115 staff
2026-01118 staff
2026-02118 staff
2026-03118 staff
2026-04119 staff
2026-05117 staff
2026-06118 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Full-time equivalent

292.1 FTE

292.1 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0303. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06282.4 FTE
2025-07282 FTE
2025-08299.5 FTE
2025-09293.8 FTE
2025-10302.6 FTE
2025-11303 FTE
2025-12299 FTE
2026-01298.1 FTE
2026-02294.3 FTE
2026-03293.5 FTE
2026-04291.3 FTE
2026-05292.3 FTE
2026-06292.1 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Headcount

306 staff

306 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0317. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06296 staff
2025-07295 staff
2025-08312 staff
2025-09306 staff
2025-10316 staff
2025-11317 staff
2025-12313 staff
2026-01312 staff
2026-02308 staff
2026-03308 staff
2026-04305 staff
2026-05306 staff
2026-06306 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Full-time equivalent

0.5 FTE

0.5 FTE was reported for “HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-060.5 FTE
2025-070.5 FTE
2025-080.5 FTE
2025-090.5 FTE
2025-100.5 FTE
2025-110.5 FTE
2025-120.5 FTE
2026-010.5 FTE
2026-020.5 FTE
2026-030.5 FTE
2026-040.5 FTE
2026-050.5 FTE
2026-060.5 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Headcount

1 staff

1 staff was reported for “HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061 staff
2025-071 staff
2025-081 staff
2025-091 staff
2025-101 staff
2025-111 staff
2025-121 staff
2026-011 staff
2026-021 staff
2026-031 staff
2026-041 staff
2026-051 staff
2026-061 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Midwives: Full-time equivalent

285.6 FTE

285.6 FTE was reported for “Midwives: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Midwives: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0289.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06287.1 FTE
2025-07288.9 FTE
2025-08284.8 FTE
2025-09283.9 FTE
2025-10289.6 FTE
2025-11288.6 FTE
2025-12288 FTE
2026-01286.4 FTE
2026-02284.9 FTE
2026-03285.5 FTE
2026-04287.1 FTE
2026-05287.9 FTE
2026-06285.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Midwives: Headcount

344 staff

344 staff was reported for “Midwives: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Midwives: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0346. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06343 staff
2025-07345 staff
2025-08340 staff
2025-09340 staff
2025-10345 staff
2025-11344 staff
2025-12343 staff
2026-01342 staff
2026-02340 staff
2026-03341 staff
2026-04345 staff
2026-05346 staff
2026-06344 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Full-time equivalent

2,429.8 FTE

2,429.8 FTE was reported for “Nurses & health visitors: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Nurses & health visitors: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,445.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,404.2 FTE
2025-072,401.6 FTE
2025-082,393.6 FTE
2025-092,406.3 FTE
2025-102,426.1 FTE
2025-112,434.2 FTE
2025-122,428.8 FTE
2026-012,433 FTE
2026-022,445.2 FTE
2026-032,431.6 FTE
2026-042,426.8 FTE
2026-052,430.5 FTE
2026-062,429.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Headcount

2,603 staff

2,603 staff was reported for “Nurses & health visitors: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Nurses & health visitors: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,617. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,567 staff
2025-072,565 staff
2025-082,558 staff
2025-092,573 staff
2025-102,596 staff
2025-112,602 staff
2025-122,596 staff
2026-012,603 staff
2026-022,617 staff
2026-032,603 staff
2026-042,604 staff
2026-052,604 staff
2026-062,603 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Full-time equivalent

989.8 FTE

989.8 FTE was reported for “Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,000.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06967.9 FTE
2025-07966.7 FTE
2025-08966.7 FTE
2025-09973.6 FTE
2025-10982.9 FTE
2025-11986.4 FTE
2025-12976.8 FTE
2026-01978.8 FTE
2026-02990.4 FTE
2026-031,000.9 FTE
2026-04995.5 FTE
2026-05995.7 FTE
2026-06989.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Headcount

1,064 staff

1,064 staff was reported for “Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,073. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,042 staff
2025-071,040 staff
2025-081,040 staff
2025-091,048 staff
2025-101,057 staff
2025-111,059 staff
2025-121,049 staff
2026-011,051 staff
2026-021,063 staff
2026-031,073 staff
2026-041,069 staff
2026-051,070 staff
2026-061,064 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

2,468.6 FTE

2,468.6 FTE was reported for “Support to clinical staff: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,550.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,537.7 FTE
2025-072,550.1 FTE
2025-082,545.8 FTE
2025-092,544.4 FTE
2025-102,537.3 FTE
2025-112,516.7 FTE
2025-122,518.7 FTE
2026-012,483.1 FTE
2026-022,488.9 FTE
2026-032,499.4 FTE
2026-042,485.9 FTE
2026-052,488.9 FTE
2026-062,468.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Headcount

2,731 staff

2,731 staff was reported for “Support to clinical staff: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to clinical staff: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,826. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,811 staff
2025-072,826 staff
2025-082,822 staff
2025-092,819 staff
2025-102,810 staff
2025-112,786 staff
2025-122,789 staff
2026-012,753 staff
2026-022,756 staff
2026-032,767 staff
2026-042,752 staff
2026-052,755 staff
2026-062,731 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Full-time equivalent

1,890.9 FTE

1,890.9 FTE was reported for “Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,966. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,954.5 FTE
2025-071,965.7 FTE
2025-081,961.9 FTE
2025-091,966 FTE
2025-101,961.5 FTE
2025-111,940 FTE
2025-121,934 FTE
2026-011,894.9 FTE
2026-021,894.5 FTE
2026-031,901.2 FTE
2026-041,892.1 FTE
2026-051,897.3 FTE
2026-061,890.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Headcount

2,085 staff

2,085 staff was reported for “Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,175. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,162 staff
2025-072,175 staff
2025-082,170 staff
2025-092,172 staff
2025-102,165 staff
2025-112,141 staff
2025-122,136 staff
2026-012,097 staff
2026-022,092 staff
2026-032,099 staff
2026-042,089 staff
2026-052,094 staff
2026-062,085 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Full-time equivalent

577.7 FTE

577.7 FTE was reported for “Support to ST&T staff: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to ST&T staff: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0598.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06583.2 FTE
2025-07584.4 FTE
2025-08583.9 FTE
2025-09578.4 FTE
2025-10575.9 FTE
2025-11576.8 FTE
2025-12584.7 FTE
2026-01588.2 FTE
2026-02594.4 FTE
2026-03598.1 FTE
2026-04593.8 FTE
2026-05591.6 FTE
2026-06577.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Headcount

646 staff

646 staff was reported for “Support to ST&T staff: Headcount”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Support to ST&T staff: Headcount

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ528 (2026-01-01 00:00:00): Transfer of around 130 central functions staff to Barts Health NHS Trust (R1H) which is the hosting organisation for a shared procurement provider for the NHS trusts in north east London. This includes the transfer of staff from Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust (RF4) (80 staff), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (RAT) (30 staff), and Homerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (RQX).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0669. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06651 staff
2025-07652 staff
2025-08653 staff
2025-09648 staff
2025-10646 staff
2025-11646 staff
2025-12654 staff
2026-01657 staff
2026-02664 staff
2026-03669 staff
2026-04664 staff
2026-05661 staff
2026-06646 staff

For your decision These numbers do not show the staffing of a particular ward or appointment.

Infection surveillance: historical context

Historical reported infections, with surveillance definitions and reporting coverage.

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated

3 reported cases

3 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community-associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 84 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 010. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0710 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-098 reported cases
2025-106 reported cases
2025-114 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-025 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-044 reported cases
2026-056 reported cases
2026-064 reported cases
2026-073 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-083 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, indeterminate-association

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Community-onset, indeterminate-association”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Community-onset, indeterminate-association

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset indeterminate association (COIA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust between 29 and 84 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date) Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases
Explore 34 additional measures

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

4 reported cases

4 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare-associated (HOHA): specimen date is 3 days or more after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 08. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-088 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-104 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-017 reported cases
2026-026 reported cases
2026-033 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-074 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Total cases

8 reported cases

8 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 016. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0714 reported cases
2025-0816 reported cases
2025-0912 reported cases
2025-1010 reported cases
2025-117 reported cases
2025-125 reported cases
2026-018 reported cases
2026-0213 reported cases
2026-036 reported cases
2026-046 reported cases
2026-059 reported cases
2026-065 reported cases
2026-078 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: The reporting trust answered 'don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the 3 months prior to CDI case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Community-onset, community-associated

39 reported cases

39 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community-associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date) Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 044. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0737 reported cases
2025-0844 reported cases
2025-0938 reported cases
2025-1030 reported cases
2025-1127 reported cases
2025-1225 reported cases
2026-0126 reported cases
2026-0230 reported cases
2026-0338 reported cases
2026-0427 reported cases
2026-0527 reported cases
2026-0636 reported cases
2026-0739 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

11 reported cases

11 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 011. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-098 reported cases
2025-106 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-124 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-0310 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-068 reported cases
2026-0711 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

16 reported cases

16 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare-associated (HOHA): specimen date is the same or more than 3 days after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 019. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-078 reported cases
2025-0810 reported cases
2025-0911 reported cases
2025-108 reported cases
2025-114 reported cases
2025-1219 reported cases
2026-019 reported cases
2026-029 reported cases
2026-037 reported cases
2026-0411 reported cases
2026-059 reported cases
2026-069 reported cases
2026-0716 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Total cases

66 reported cases

66 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 066. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0748 reported cases
2025-0859 reported cases
2025-0957 reported cases
2025-1044 reported cases
2025-1133 reported cases
2025-1248 reported cases
2026-0140 reported cases
2026-0240 reported cases
2026-0355 reported cases
2026-0441 reported cases
2026-0537 reported cases
2026-0653 reported cases
2026-0766 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: the reporting trust answered 'don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the month prior to the E. coli case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, community-associated

6 reported cases

6 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community-associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date) Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 016. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-079 reported cases
2025-0810 reported cases
2025-0916 reported cases
2025-107 reported cases
2025-119 reported cases
2025-1211 reported cases
2026-016 reported cases
2026-0211 reported cases
2026-034 reported cases
2026-0410 reported cases
2026-058 reported cases
2026-0613 reported cases
2026-076 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

2 reported cases

2 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-052 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

7 reported cases

7 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare-associated (HOHA): specimen date is the same or more than 3 days after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-079 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-097 reported cases
2025-106 reported cases
2025-116 reported cases
2025-126 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-038 reported cases
2026-049 reported cases
2026-054 reported cases
2026-069 reported cases
2026-077 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Total cases

15 reported cases

15 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 023. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0721 reported cases
2025-0814 reported cases
2025-0923 reported cases
2025-1015 reported cases
2025-1116 reported cases
2025-1219 reported cases
2026-018 reported cases
2026-0214 reported cases
2026-0314 reported cases
2026-0420 reported cases
2026-0514 reported cases
2026-0622 reported cases
2026-0715 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Klebsiella spp: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Klebsiella spp: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: the reporting trust answered 'don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the month prior to the Klebsiella spp. case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community-associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date) Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 02. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare-associated (HOHA): specimen date is the same or more than 3 days after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 02. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-052 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Total cases

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-083 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: the reporting trust answered 'Don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the month prior to the MRSA case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Community-onset, community-associated

6 reported cases

6 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date) Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-086 reported cases
2025-099 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-116 reported cases
2025-129 reported cases
2026-017 reported cases
2026-025 reported cases
2026-036 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-059 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-076 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

3 reported cases

3 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare associated (HOHA): specimen date is the same or more than 3 days after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-076 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-094 reported cases
2025-101 reported cases
2025-116 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-019 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-035 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-055 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-073 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Total cases

10 reported cases

10 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 016. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-079 reported cases
2025-086 reported cases
2025-0913 reported cases
2025-107 reported cases
2025-1113 reported cases
2025-1212 reported cases
2026-0116 reported cases
2026-029 reported cases
2026-0311 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-0514 reported cases
2026-067 reported cases
2026-0710 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MSSA: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MSSA: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: the reporting trust answered 'don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the month prior to the MSSA case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset community-associated (COCA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient has not been discharged from the same reporting organisation in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-101 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Community-onset healthcare-associated (COHA): is not categorised HOHA and the patient was most recently discharged from the same reporting trust in the 28 days prior to the specimen date (where day one is the specimen date). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 02. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-072 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Hospital-onset healthcare-associated (HOHA): specimen date is the same or more than 3 days after the current admission date (where day of admission is day one). Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 06. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-084 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-106 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-066 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Total cases

2 reported cases

2 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Total cases”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Total cases

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-076 reported cases
2025-086 reported cases
2025-096 reported cases
2025-107 reported cases
2025-116 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-033 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-069 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Unknown

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Unknown”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Unknown

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST. Unknown: the reporting trust answered 'don't know' to the question regarding previous discharge in the month prior to the P. aeruginosa case. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

For your decision Raw counts cannot rank hospitals with different sizes and patient groups.

National infection context and why counts cannot rank hospitals

Organisation environment: PLACE assessments

Environment assessments reported across an organisation, potentially covering several sites.

2025 reporting organisation

Cleanliness assessment

99.4%

99.4% was reported for “Cleanliness assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cleanliness assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Condition Appearance and Maintenance assessment

97.4%

97.4% was reported for “Condition Appearance and Maintenance assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Condition Appearance and Maintenance assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Dementia assessment

91.1%

91.1% was reported for “Dementia assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dementia assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

Explore 5 additional measures

2025 reporting organisation

Disability assessment

93.1%

93.1% was reported for “Disability assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Disability assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Food assessment

90.7%

90.7% was reported for “Food assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Food assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Organisation Food assessment

93.8%

93.8% was reported for “Organisation Food assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Organisation Food assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Privacy, Dignity and Wellbeing assessment

91.5%

91.5% was reported for “Privacy, Dignity and Wellbeing assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Privacy, Dignity and Wellbeing assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

2025 reporting organisation

Ward Food assessment

90.3%

90.3% was reported for “Ward Food assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ward Food assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

For your decision Confirm the arrangements at the exact building you will attend.

Hospital mortality indicators and their limitations

A statistical mortality indicator that needs the publisher’s interpretation and context.

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Statistical expected deaths in SHMI cohort

4,555 expected deaths

4,555 expected deaths was reported for “Statistical expected deaths in SHMI cohort”. Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation.

Definition and source

Published measure: Statistical expected deaths in SHMI cohort

Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation. SHMI is not a measure of quality of care, avoidable deaths or excess deaths. Do not rank trusts using SHMI. Case mix, diagnosis coding and same-day emergency-care recording affect interpretation. Published death and spell counts are rounded. Expected deaths are a statistical construct, not a target. Publisher band: Lower than expected. Source unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST (RF4).

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Observed deaths in SHMI cohort

2,680 deaths

2,680 deaths was reported for “Observed deaths in SHMI cohort”. Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation.

Definition and source

Published measure: Observed deaths in SHMI cohort

Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation. SHMI is not a measure of quality of care, avoidable deaths or excess deaths. Do not rank trusts using SHMI. Case mix, diagnosis coding and same-day emergency-care recording affect interpretation. Published death and spell counts are rounded. Expected deaths are a statistical construct, not a target. Publisher band: Lower than expected. Source unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST (RF4).

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator

0.6 ratio

0.6 ratio was reported for “Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator”. Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation.

Definition and source

Published measure: Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator

Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation. SHMI is not a measure of quality of care, avoidable deaths or excess deaths. Do not rank trusts using SHMI. Case mix, diagnosis coding and same-day emergency-care recording affect interpretation. Published death and spell counts are rounded. Expected deaths are a statistical construct, not a target. Publisher band: Lower than expected. Source unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST (RF4).

Publisher over-dispersion control limits (not a confidence interval): 0.91.2 ratio.

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

Explore 1 additional measures

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Hospital provider spells in SHMI cohort

124,590 spells

124,590 spells was reported for “Hospital provider spells in SHMI cohort”. Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hospital provider spells in SHMI cohort

Deaths during admission or within 30 days of discharge, relative to a statistical expectation. SHMI is not a measure of quality of care, avoidable deaths or excess deaths. Do not rank trusts using SHMI. Case mix, diagnosis coding and same-day emergency-care recording affect interpretation. Published death and spell counts are rounded. Expected deaths are a statistical construct, not a target. Publisher band: Lower than expected. Source unit: BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST (RF4).

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

For your decision Do not use this measure alone to judge safety or predict an individual outcome.

About this organisation

Recorded care types
NHS trusts, Provider groups
Local authority area
Havering
Funding information
NHS organisation — confirm the service’s funding
NHS organisation code
RF4
CQC identifier
RF4

CQC inspection evidence

Keep the publication date and assessed service in view. Ratings are reproduced as categories; they are not averaged into a score.

AssessmentRatingPublished
CaringGood10 February 2023
Combined Quality RatingRequires improvement9 January 2020
EffectiveGood10 February 2023
OverallRequires improvement10 February 2023
ResponsiveRequires improvement10 February 2023
SafeRequires improvement10 February 2023
Use of ResourcesRequires improvement9 January 2020
Well-ledRequires improvement10 February 2023

Service evidence

Connected organisations and services

Sources and coverage

Source changes may take time to appear here. Suggest a correction · Represent this provider