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

NHS trusts · Harlow

The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust

Hamstel Road, Harlow, CM20 1QX

CQC: no overall rating shownActive source recordOrganisation information

What can I learn about The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust?

No overall CQC rating is available on this profile. 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

7.7 out of 10

7.7 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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

9 out of 10

9 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.89.5 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?

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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: 243.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.68.8 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
20217.7 out of 10
20227.6 out of 10
20237.7 out of 10
20247.6 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10
Explore 60 additional measures

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.9 out of 10

7.9 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: 130.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 07.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.7 out of 10
20257.9 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: 181.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.47.6 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
20245.3 out of 10
20255.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

9.3 out of 10

9.3 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: 374.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 9.19.8 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
20209.4 out of 10
20219.1 out of 10
20229.2 out of 10
20239.3 out of 10
20249.2 out of 10
20259.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8 out of 10

8 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: 387.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Much worse.

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 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.4 out of 10
20218.2 out of 10
20228.1 out of 10
20238.1 out of 10
20248.1 out of 10
20258 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 08.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.9 out of 10
20218.8 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.4 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: 414.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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
20208.2 out of 10
20218.2 out of 10
20228.2 out of 10
20238.3 out of 10
20248.1 out of 10
20258.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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: 399.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 08.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.6 out of 10
20218.2 out of 10
20228 out of 10
20238.2 out of 10
20247.9 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 419.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.9 out of 10
20218.7 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.3 out of 10
20258.8 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: 417.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.39.3 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
20218.1 out of 10
20228.2 out of 10
20238.2 out of 10
20248 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?

5.7 out of 10

5.7 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: 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.78.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 05.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20245.3 out of 10
20255.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.2 out of 10

7.2 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: 421.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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
20226.4 out of 10
20236.5 out of 10
20246.4 out of 10
20257.2 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?

7.5 out of 10

7.5 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: 369.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 07.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.9 out of 10
20217.5 out of 10
20227.2 out of 10
20237.3 out of 10
20246.8 out of 10
20257.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.8 out of 10

6.8 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: 401.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

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 06.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.7 out of 10
20216.4 out of 10
20226.4 out of 10
20236.6 out of 10
20246.3 out of 10
20256.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.4 out of 10

8.4 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: 405.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

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
20218.5 out of 10
20228.1 out of 10
20238.5 out of 10
20248.3 out of 10
20258.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.3 out of 10

7.3 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: 358.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 07.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.7 out of 10
20217 out of 10
20227 out of 10
20237.2 out of 10
20246.6 out of 10
20257.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Were you given enough privacy when being examined or treated?

9.4 out of 10

9.4 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: 413.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 9.29.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 09.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.4 out of 10
20219.1 out of 10
20229.4 out of 10
20239.5 out of 10
20249.3 out of 10
20259.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.59.2 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
20208.7 out of 10
20218.4 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.5 out of 10
20248 out of 10
20258.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8 out of 10

8 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: 384.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.4 out of 10
20227.5 out of 10
20237.7 out of 10
20247.3 out of 10
20258 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)

8.3 out of 10

8.3 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: 67.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.39.4 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)

8.5 out of 10

8.5 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: 65.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.19.1 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: 48.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.39.4 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? Accessibility needs (e.g. mobility needs, room adaptations)

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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: 140.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.79.2 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? Dietary needs (e.g. medical, allergy, vegan)

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? 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: 117.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.98.8 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)

5.8 out of 10

5.8 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: 83.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.17.5 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?

Not reported

There is no usable published value for this measure in the selected release.

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?

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW).

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 05.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20245.7 out of 10
2025Not reported

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.7 out of 10

6.7 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: 33.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.88.8 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 out of 10
20256.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.2 out of 10

6.2 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: 405.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.27.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.6 out of 10
20216.3 out of 10
20226.2 out of 10
20236.2 out of 10
20245.8 out of 10
20256.2 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?

5.6 out of 10

5.6 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: 286.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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?

7.7 out of 10

7.7 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: 144.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.59.1 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
20217.5 out of 10
20228.1 out of 10
20238 out of 10
20247.4 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.5 out of 10

6.5 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: 416.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 07. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207 out of 10
20216.4 out of 10
20226.2 out of 10
20235.9 out of 10
20246.1 out of 10
20256.5 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.

7.4 out of 10

7.4 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: 390.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 07.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.8 out of 10
20217.3 out of 10
20227.3 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20246.9 out of 10
20257.4 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?

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 272.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

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 08.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20218.6 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.7 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?

5.9 out of 10

5.9 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: 248.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.47.2 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?

4.3 out of 10

4.3 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: 295.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 3.75.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 04.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20204.5 out of 10
20214 out of 10
20224 out of 10
20233.9 out of 10
20243.8 out of 10
20254.3 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.

6.4 out of 10

6.4 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: 78.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.78.6 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 06.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.3 out of 10
20256.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.1 out of 10

6.1 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: 365.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

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 06.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.4 out of 10
20216 out of 10
20225.8 out of 10
20235.6 out of 10
20245.6 out of 10
20256.1 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?

6.6 out of 10

6.6 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: 381.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.88.6 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
20216.3 out of 10
20225.7 out of 10
20236.1 out of 10
20245.6 out of 10
20256.6 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.

7.6 out of 10

7.6 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: 196.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.2 out of 10
20217.5 out of 10
20227.6 out of 10
20237.2 out of 10
20247.2 out of 10
20257.6 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.

6.1 out of 10

6.1 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: 238.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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
20245.3 out of 10
20256.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 413.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.6 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20258.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

9 out of 10

9 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: 408.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.89.5 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
20218.6 out of 10
20228.6 out of 10
20238.9 out of 10
20248.6 out of 10
20259 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.

7.7 out of 10

7.7 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: 413.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 08.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.5 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20237.5 out of 10
20247.4 out of 10
20257.7 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?

6 out of 10

6 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: 402.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 06.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.8 out of 10
20215.3 out of 10
20225.5 out of 10
20235.5 out of 10
20245.2 out of 10
20256 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

5.3 out of 10

5.3 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.77.5 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 05.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20235.8 out of 10
20245.5 out of 10
20255.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238 out of 10
20247.8 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.1 out of 10

8.1 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.4 out of 10
20247.3 out of 10
20258.1 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.89.5 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
20238.6 out of 10
20248.6 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

3.1 out of 10

3.1 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: 418.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

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 03.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20232.7 out of 10
20242.8 out of 10
20253.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 415.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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 09.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.1 out of 10
20218.9 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20258.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.6 out of 10

7.6 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: 267.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat 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 08.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.6 out of 10
20227.6 out of 10
20237.4 out of 10
20247.1 out of 10
20257.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Admission to hospital

6 out of 10

6 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). 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

7.8 out of 10

7.8 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.58.6 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Doctors

8.4 out of 10

8.4 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: 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

8.1 out of 10

8.1 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: 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

8 out of 10

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat 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

7.5 out of 10

7.5 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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.88.8 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Virtual wards

Not reported

There is no usable published value for this measure in the selected release.

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW).

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: The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

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

68.5%

Total

68.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 38,992 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 38,992; 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

38,992 waiting-list entries

Total

38,992 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

3,876 waiting-list entries

General Surgery Service

3,876 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 95 additional measures

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,825 waiting-list entries

Urology Service

2,825 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

5,458 waiting-list entries

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

5,458 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

3,297 waiting-list entries

Ear Nose and Throat Service

3,297 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

2,943 waiting-list entries

Ophthalmology Service

2,943 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

1,671 waiting-list entries

Oral Surgery Service

1,671 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

42 waiting-list entries

General Internal Medicine Service

42 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

2,883 waiting-list entries

Gastroenterology Service

2,883 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

3,912 waiting-list entries

Cardiology Service

3,912 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

2,129 waiting-list entries

Dermatology Service

2,129 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

802 waiting-list entries

Respiratory Medicine Service

802 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

1,315 waiting-list entries

Neurology Service

1,315 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

1,240 waiting-list entries

Rheumatology Service

1,240 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

22 waiting-list entries

Elderly Medicine Service

22 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

3,071 waiting-list entries

Gynaecology Service

3,071 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

491 waiting-list entries

Other - Medical Services

491 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

496 waiting-list entries

Other - Paediatric Services

496 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

1,065 waiting-list entries

Other - Surgical Services

1,065 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

1,454 waiting-list entries

Other - Other Services

1,454 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

69.5%

General Surgery Service

69.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,876 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 3,876; 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

68.4%

Urology Service

68.4% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,825 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 2,825; 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

55.8%

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

55.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 5,458 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 5,458; 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%

Ear Nose and Throat Service

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 3,297 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 3,297; 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

68.2%

Ophthalmology Service

68.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,943 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 2,943; 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

51.7%

Oral Surgery Service

51.7% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,671 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 1,671; 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%

General Internal Medicine 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 42 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 42; 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

62.5%

Gastroenterology Service

62.5% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,883 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 2,883; 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

69.2%

Cardiology Service

69.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,912 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 3,912; 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

89.9%

Dermatology Service

89.9% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,129 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 2,129; 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

77.8%

Respiratory Medicine Service

77.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 802 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 802; 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

73.3%

Neurology Service

73.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,315 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 1,315; 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

64.6%

Rheumatology Service

64.6% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,240 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 1,240; 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%

Elderly Medicine 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 22 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: Elderly Medicine Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 22; 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

72.8%

Gynaecology Service

72.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,071 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 3,071; 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

85.3%

Other - Medical Services

85.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 491 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 491; 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%

Other - Paediatric Services

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 496 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 496; 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

49.2%

Other - Surgical Services

49.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,065 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 1,065; 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

91.2%

Other - Other Services

91.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,454 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 1,454; 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

0.8%

General Surgery 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 3,876 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,876; 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

0.6%

Urology Service

0.6% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 2,825 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,825; 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%

Trauma and Orthopaedic 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 5,458 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 5,458; 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

2.1%

Ear Nose and Throat Service

2.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 3,297 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 3,297; 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%

Ophthalmology Service

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 2,943 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,943; 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

2.8%

Oral Surgery Service

2.8% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 1,671 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,671; 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 42 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 42; 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%

Gastroenterology 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 2,883 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,883; 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%

Cardiology 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 3,912 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,912; 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%

Dermatology 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 2,129 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,129; 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 802 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 802; 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%

Neurology 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 1,315 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,315; 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%

Rheumatology 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 1,240 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,240; 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 22 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 22; 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%

Gynaecology Service

2% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 3,071 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,071; 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

1.1%

Total

1.1% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 38,992 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 38,992; 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%

Other - Medical Services

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 491 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 491; 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%

Other - Paediatric Services

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 496 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 496; 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

5.2%

Other - Surgical Services

5.2% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 1,065 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,065; 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

0.6%

Other - Other Services

0.6% of open waiting-list records had already waited more than a year. Your referral team can explain your own next step.

Based on 1,454 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,454; 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

485 pathways

General Surgery Service

485 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

534 pathways

General Surgery Service

534 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

174 pathways

Urology Service

174 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

341 pathways

Urology Service

341 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

270 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

270 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

535 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

535 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

114 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

114 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

545 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

545 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

157 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

157 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

564 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

564 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 admitted pathways

62 pathways

Oral Surgery Service

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Oral 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

Oral Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

215 pathways

Oral Surgery Service

215 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

General Internal Medicine Service: completed admitted pathways

6 pathways

General Internal Medicine Service

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

Definition and source

Published measure: General Internal 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

Gastroenterology Service: completed admitted pathways

220 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

220 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

207 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

207 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

68 pathways

Cardiology Service

68 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

380 pathways

Cardiology Service

380 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

2 pathways

Dermatology Service

2 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

367 pathways

Dermatology Service

367 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

32 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

32 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

180 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

180 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 non-admitted pathways

60 pathways

Neurology Service

60 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

13 pathways

Rheumatology Service

13 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

134 pathways

Rheumatology Service

134 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

5 pathways

Elderly Medicine Service

5 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

2 pathways

Elderly Medicine Service

2 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

145 pathways

Gynaecology Service

145 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

692 pathways

Gynaecology Service

692 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

1,920 pathways

Total

1,920 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

5,583 pathways

Total

5,583 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

37 pathways

Other - Medical Services

37 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

144 pathways

Other - Medical Services

144 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 - Paediatric Services: completed admitted pathways

2 pathways

Other - Paediatric Services

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

Definition and source

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

278 pathways

Other - Paediatric Services

278 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

22 pathways

Other - Surgical Services

22 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

29 pathways

Other - Surgical Services

29 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

106 pathways

Other - Other Services

106 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

376 pathways

Other - Other Services

376 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

1,135 waiting-list entries

1,135 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

92 waiting-list entries

92 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

726 waiting-list entries

726 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 36 additional measures

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

12 waiting-list entries

12 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

0 waiting-list entries

0 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

319 waiting-list entries

319 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

23 waiting-list entries

23 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

92 waiting-list entries

92 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

2,656 waiting-list entries

2,656 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

5,648 waiting-list entries

5,648 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

0 waiting-list entries

0 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

10,703 waiting-list entries

10,703 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

0 waiting-list entries

0 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

75.8%

75.8% 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 1,135 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,135; 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

3.3%

3.3% 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 92 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: COLONOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 92; 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

11%

11% 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 726 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: CT: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 726; 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

50%

50% 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 12 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: CYSTOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 12; 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

Not reported

There is no usable published value for this measure in the selected release.

Based on 0 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: DEXA_SCAN: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 0; 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

4.1%

4.1% 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 319 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 319; 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

4.4%

4.4% 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 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 23; 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

4.4%

4.4% 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 92 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: GASTROSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 92; 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

32.5%

32.5% 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 2,656 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRI: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,656; 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

27.5%

27.5% 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 5,648 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 5,648; 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

Not reported

There is no usable published value for this measure in the selected release.

Based on 0 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: PERIPHERAL_NEUROPHYS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 0; 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

31.6%

31.6% 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 10,703 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: TOTAL: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 10,703; 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

Not reported

There is no usable published value for this measure in the selected release.

Based on 0 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: URODYNAMICS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 0; 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

925 tests

925 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

402 tests

402 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

4,120 tests

4,120 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

166 tests

166 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

62 tests

62 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

1,140 tests

1,140 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

95 tests

95 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

375 tests

375 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

2,381 tests

2,381 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: 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

4,375 tests

4,375 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

3 tests

3 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

14,052 tests

14,052 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

8 tests

8 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

71.3%

71.3% 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 1,950; 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

94.7%

94.7% 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 171; 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

60.2%

60.2% 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 152; 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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 28.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 28.

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: RQW.

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: 28.

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: RQW.

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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.5 EQ-5D Index points

0.5 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

23 pairs

23 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

28 pairs

28 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2 pairs

2 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

3 pairs

3 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 28.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

69.3 EQ VAS points

69.3 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

48 EQ VAS points

48 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

21.4 EQ VAS points

21.4 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

20 pairs

20 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

28 pairs

28 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 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: 28.

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: RQW.

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

22.6 Oxford Hip Score points

22.6 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

40.1 Oxford Hip Score points

40.1 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

38.5 Oxford Hip Score points

38.5 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

14.9 Oxford Hip Score points

14.9 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

23.6 Oxford Hip Score points

23.6 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

29 pairs

29 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

31 pairs

31 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

1 EQ-5D Index points

1 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2 pairs

2 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

3 pairs

3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

84 EQ VAS points

84 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

68 EQ VAS points

68 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

16 EQ VAS points

16 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

3 pairs

3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

0 pairs

0 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

46.3 Oxford Hip Score points

46.3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

35 Oxford Hip Score points

35 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

11.3 Oxford Hip Score points

11.3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

3 pairs

3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Revision · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

3 pairs

3 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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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: 3.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 23.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 23.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

22 pairs

22 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

23 pairs

23 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 23.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 21.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

69.9 EQ VAS points

69.9 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

58.1 EQ VAS points

58.1 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

11.8 EQ VAS points

11.8 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

16 pairs

16 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

21 pairs

21 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

4 pairs

4 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: 21.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 24.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

37.8 Oxford Knee Score points

37.8 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

15.7 Oxford Knee Score points

15.7 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

22 Oxford Knee Score points

22 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

24 pairs

24 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

24 pairs

24 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted preoperative score

0.6 EQ-5D Index points

0.6 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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 EQ-5D Index points

0 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

1 pairs

1 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

75 EQ VAS points

75 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

80 EQ VAS points

80 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

-5 EQ VAS points

-5 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

0 pairs

0 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

1 pairs

1 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

39 Oxford Knee Score points

39 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

11 Oxford Knee Score points

11 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

28 Oxford Knee Score points

28 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Revision · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

1 pairs

1 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 1.

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: RQW.

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

0.5 EQ-5D Index points

0.5 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

25 pairs

25 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

31 pairs

31 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

3 pairs

3 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

3 pairs

3 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

14.6 EQ VAS points

14.6 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

75.5 EQ VAS points

75.5 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

70.7 EQ VAS points

70.7 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

49.9 EQ VAS points

49.9 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

20.8 EQ VAS points

20.8 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

23 pairs

23 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

31 pairs

31 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 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: 31.

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: RQW.

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

23.7 Oxford Hip Score points

23.7 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

41.3 Oxford Hip Score points

41.3 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

39.2 Oxford Hip Score points

39.2 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

16.7 Oxford Hip Score points

16.7 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

22.5 Oxford Hip Score points

22.5 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

32 pairs

32 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

34 pairs

34 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 34.

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: RQW.

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: 34.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 24.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted postoperative score

0.8 EQ-5D Index points

0.8 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Unadjusted health gain

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

0.4 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

22 pairs

22 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ-5D Index: Modelled questionnaire pairs

24 pairs

24 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 24.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 22.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

70.1 EQ VAS points

70.1 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

59.1 EQ VAS points

59.1 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

11 EQ VAS points

11 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

16 pairs

16 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

22 pairs

22 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 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: 22.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

Reported sample: 25.

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: RQW.

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

Exact value withheld

The publisher has withheld this value. It must not be treated as zero.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 25.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

37.8 Oxford Knee Score points

37.8 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

15.5 Oxford Knee Score points

15.5 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

22.3 Oxford Knee Score points

22.3 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

25 pairs

25 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

25 pairs

25 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 25.

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: RQW.

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

10.5%

10.5% 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
2026-048.5%
2026-058.7%
2026-0610%
2026-0710.5%

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

A&E 4 hour performance

79.3%

79.3% 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
2026-0482.3%
2026-0581.7%
2026-0679.6%
2026-0779.3%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 31 Day Treatment Standard

91.9%

91.9% 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
2025-0693.9%
2025-0791.9%
2025-0896.8%
2025-0993.9%
2025-1093.9%
2025-1197.2%
2025-1296%
2026-0196.7%
2026-0296.7%
2026-0397.7%
2026-0497.1%
2026-0597.1%
2026-0691.9%
Explore 5 additional measures

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 62 Day Combined Performance

61.9%

61.9% 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
2025-0641.8%
2025-0757.7%
2025-0858.6%
2025-0961.8%
2025-1067.4%
2025-1165.1%
2025-1267.6%
2026-0163.2%
2026-0260%
2026-0362.7%
2026-0460.3%
2026-0562.3%
2026-0661.9%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer Faster Diagnostic Standard

72.4%

72.4% 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
2025-0672.4%
2025-0773.4%
2025-0866.7%
2025-0977%
2025-1077%
2025-1172.7%
2025-1277.4%
2026-0173.4%
2026-0281.4%
2026-0380%
2026-0472.1%
2026-0573.7%
2026-0672.4%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Diagnostics proportion waiting over 6 weeks

34.9%

34.9% 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
2025-0633.7%
2025-0734.5%
2025-0834.8%
2025-0928.8%
2025-1028.7%
2025-1131.5%
2025-1235.2%
2026-0135.8%
2026-0227.5%
2026-0328.7%
2026-0433.2%
2026-0536.4%
2026-0634.9%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Percentage waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment

1.1%

1.1% 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
2025-064.7%
2025-075.1%
2025-085.5%
2025-095%
2025-104.6%
2025-114.7%
2025-124.1%
2026-014.1%
2026-023.3%
2026-031.4%
2026-041.2%
2026-051%
2026-061.1%

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
2025-0651.1%
2025-0752%
2025-0852.8%
2025-0954.1%
2025-1055.5%
2025-1156.1%
2025-1256.3%
2026-0156%
2026-0257.8%
2026-0364.1%
2026-0465.3%
2026-0566.8%
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

3,760.9 FTE

3,760.9 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 03,780.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-063,684.5 FTE
2025-073,690.2 FTE
2025-083,722.1 FTE
2025-093,716 FTE
2025-103,735.8 FTE
2025-113,740.6 FTE
2025-123,758.7 FTE
2026-013,780.9 FTE
2026-023,756.1 FTE
2026-033,749.6 FTE
2026-043,751.1 FTE
2026-053,754.9 FTE
2026-063,760.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

All staff groups: Headcount

4,138 staff

4,138 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 04,167. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-064,060 staff
2025-074,069 staff
2025-084,102 staff
2025-094,096 staff
2025-104,123 staff
2025-114,127 staff
2025-124,144 staff
2026-014,167 staff
2026-024,145 staff
2026-034,134 staff
2026-044,129 staff
2026-054,135 staff
2026-064,138 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Full-time equivalent

678.7 FTE

678.7 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0690.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06654.3 FTE
2025-07658.3 FTE
2025-08662.2 FTE
2025-09667.3 FTE
2025-10683.6 FTE
2025-11687.9 FTE
2025-12690.2 FTE
2026-01689 FTE
2026-02680.5 FTE
2026-03676.4 FTE
2026-04673.9 FTE
2026-05675 FTE
2026-06678.7 FTE
Explore 45 additional measures

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Headcount

769 staff

769 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0785. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06741 staff
2025-07746 staff
2025-08749 staff
2025-09755 staff
2025-10776 staff
2025-11782 staff
2025-12783 staff
2026-01785 staff
2026-02775 staff
2026-03770 staff
2026-04764 staff
2026-05768 staff
2026-06769 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Full-time equivalent

214 FTE

214 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0233.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06223.3 FTE
2025-07224.3 FTE
2025-08226.8 FTE
2025-09227 FTE
2025-10232.6 FTE
2025-11233.7 FTE
2025-12232.1 FTE
2026-01230.9 FTE
2026-02227.7 FTE
2026-03226.7 FTE
2026-04223.9 FTE
2026-05216.5 FTE
2026-06214 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Headcount

230 staff

230 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0249. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06239 staff
2025-07241 staff
2025-08242 staff
2025-09242 staff
2025-10248 staff
2025-11249 staff
2025-12248 staff
2026-01249 staff
2026-02246 staff
2026-03245 staff
2026-04240 staff
2026-05233 staff
2026-06230 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent

337.8 FTE

337.8 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0337.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06305.9 FTE
2025-07307.9 FTE
2025-08307.9 FTE
2025-09313.8 FTE
2025-10325.5 FTE
2025-11327.7 FTE
2025-12332.6 FTE
2026-01331.7 FTE
2026-02328.6 FTE
2026-03325.4 FTE
2026-04324.7 FTE
2026-05331.1 FTE
2026-06337.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Headcount

409 staff

409 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0409. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06375 staff
2025-07377 staff
2025-08377 staff
2025-09384 staff
2025-10400 staff
2025-11404 staff
2025-12407 staff
2026-01407 staff
2026-02402 staff
2026-03398 staff
2026-04396 staff
2026-05404 staff
2026-06409 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Full-time equivalent

84 FTE

84 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 092.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0689.1 FTE
2025-0791.1 FTE
2025-0892.5 FTE
2025-0991.5 FTE
2025-1090.5 FTE
2025-1192.5 FTE
2025-1290.5 FTE
2026-0189.3 FTE
2026-0285.3 FTE
2026-0383.3 FTE
2026-0484.4 FTE
2026-0584.5 FTE
2026-0684 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Headcount

87 staff

87 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 095. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0691 staff
2025-0793 staff
2025-0895 staff
2025-0994 staff
2025-1093 staff
2025-1195 staff
2025-1293 staff
2026-0192 staff
2026-0288 staff
2026-0386 staff
2026-0487 staff
2026-0588 staff
2026-0687 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Full-time equivalent

43 FTE

43 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 043. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0636 FTE
2025-0735 FTE
2025-0835 FTE
2025-0935 FTE
2025-1035 FTE
2025-1134 FTE
2025-1235 FTE
2026-0137 FTE
2026-0239 FTE
2026-0341 FTE
2026-0441 FTE
2026-0543 FTE
2026-0643 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Headcount

43 staff

43 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 043. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0636 staff
2025-0735 staff
2025-0835 staff
2025-0935 staff
2025-1035 staff
2025-1134 staff
2025-1235 staff
2026-0137 staff
2026-0239 staff
2026-0341 staff
2026-0441 staff
2026-0543 staff
2026-0643 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

2,203 FTE

2,203 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,203. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,101.5 FTE
2025-072,090.9 FTE
2025-082,115.9 FTE
2025-092,121.4 FTE
2025-102,147.5 FTE
2025-112,167 FTE
2025-122,175.9 FTE
2026-012,200.5 FTE
2026-022,191 FTE
2026-032,189.8 FTE
2026-042,196.2 FTE
2026-052,200.4 FTE
2026-062,203 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Headcount

2,371 staff

2,371 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,374. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,268 staff
2025-072,259 staff
2025-082,286 staff
2025-092,292 staff
2025-102,321 staff
2025-112,343 staff
2025-122,351 staff
2026-012,374 staff
2026-022,368 staff
2026-032,364 staff
2026-042,367 staff
2026-052,371 staff
2026-062,371 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Full-time equivalent

2.6 FTE

2.6 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062.6 FTE
2025-072.6 FTE
2025-082.6 FTE
2025-092.6 FTE
2025-102.6 FTE
2025-112.6 FTE
2025-122.6 FTE
2026-012.6 FTE
2026-022.6 FTE
2026-032.6 FTE
2026-042.6 FTE
2026-052.6 FTE
2026-062.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Headcount

3 staff

3 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-063 staff
2025-073 staff
2025-083 staff
2025-093 staff
2025-103 staff
2025-113 staff
2025-123 staff
2026-013 staff
2026-023 staff
2026-033 staff
2026-043 staff
2026-053 staff
2026-063 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Full-time equivalent

642.9 FTE

642.9 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0653.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06614.8 FTE
2025-07611.7 FTE
2025-08639 FTE
2025-09639.8 FTE
2025-10635.1 FTE
2025-11637.3 FTE
2025-12638.8 FTE
2026-01638.9 FTE
2026-02641.5 FTE
2026-03641.4 FTE
2026-04652.2 FTE
2026-05653.9 FTE
2026-06642.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Headcount

675 staff

675 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0687. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06645 staff
2025-07643 staff
2025-08671 staff
2025-09674 staff
2025-10670 staff
2025-11672 staff
2025-12675 staff
2026-01674 staff
2026-02679 staff
2026-03679 staff
2026-04685 staff
2026-05687 staff
2026-06675 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Full-time equivalent

9 FTE

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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 09.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-068.6 FTE
2025-078.6 FTE
2025-088.6 FTE
2025-099.5 FTE
2025-109.4 FTE
2025-119.9 FTE
2025-129.9 FTE
2026-019.6 FTE
2026-029.6 FTE
2026-039.6 FTE
2026-049.7 FTE
2026-059 FTE
2026-069 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Headcount

11 staff

11 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 012. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0610 staff
2025-0710 staff
2025-0810 staff
2025-0911 staff
2025-1011 staff
2025-1112 staff
2025-1212 staff
2026-0112 staff
2026-0212 staff
2026-0312 staff
2026-0412 staff
2026-0511 staff
2026-0611 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Full-time equivalent

202.7 FTE

202.7 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0206.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06204.8 FTE
2025-07205.7 FTE
2025-08206.9 FTE
2025-09206.5 FTE
2025-10202.4 FTE
2025-11203.4 FTE
2025-12202.4 FTE
2026-01206.7 FTE
2026-02205.1 FTE
2026-03205.2 FTE
2026-04205.6 FTE
2026-05204.6 FTE
2026-06202.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Headcount

219 staff

219 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0223. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06221 staff
2025-07222 staff
2025-08223 staff
2025-09223 staff
2025-10219 staff
2025-11220 staff
2025-12219 staff
2026-01223 staff
2026-02222 staff
2026-03223 staff
2026-04222 staff
2026-05221 staff
2026-06219 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Full-time equivalent

99.7 FTE

99.7 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0106.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0683.6 FTE
2025-0780.6 FTE
2025-0886.2 FTE
2025-0987.1 FTE
2025-1088.7 FTE
2025-1186.7 FTE
2025-1285.9 FTE
2026-0184.5 FTE
2026-0296.3 FTE
2026-0396.3 FTE
2026-04104.4 FTE
2026-05106.5 FTE
2026-0699.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Headcount

101 staff

101 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0108. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0685 staff
2025-0782 staff
2025-0887 staff
2025-0988 staff
2025-1090 staff
2025-1188 staff
2025-1288 staff
2026-0186 staff
2026-0298 staff
2026-0398 staff
2026-04106 staff
2026-05108 staff
2026-06101 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Full-time equivalent

60.6 FTE

60.6 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 061.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0654.5 FTE
2025-0754.5 FTE
2025-0861.3 FTE
2025-0961.3 FTE
2025-1060.3 FTE
2025-1161.3 FTE
2025-1260.4 FTE
2026-0160.4 FTE
2026-0260.2 FTE
2026-0359.2 FTE
2026-0460.5 FTE
2026-0560.5 FTE
2026-0660.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Headcount

62 staff

62 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 063. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0655 staff
2025-0755 staff
2025-0863 staff
2025-0963 staff
2025-1062 staff
2025-1163 staff
2025-1262 staff
2026-0162 staff
2026-0262 staff
2026-0361 staff
2026-0462 staff
2026-0562 staff
2026-0662 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Full-time equivalent

44.2 FTE

44.2 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 048.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0642.8 FTE
2025-0742.8 FTE
2025-0847.7 FTE
2025-0947.7 FTE
2025-1047.7 FTE
2025-1147.1 FTE
2025-1248.6 FTE
2026-0146.1 FTE
2026-0244.9 FTE
2026-0344.9 FTE
2026-0446.1 FTE
2026-0545 FTE
2026-0644.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Headcount

45 staff

45 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 050. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0644 staff
2025-0744 staff
2025-0849 staff
2025-0949 staff
2025-1049 staff
2025-1148 staff
2025-1250 staff
2026-0147 staff
2026-0246 staff
2026-0346 staff
2026-0447 staff
2026-0546 staff
2026-0645 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Full-time equivalent

0.4 FTE

0.4 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

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
2025-060.3 FTE
2025-070.5 FTE
2025-080.4 FTE
2025-090.4 FTE
2025-100.5 FTE
2025-110.5 FTE
2025-120.5 FTE
2026-010.3 FTE
2026-020.5 FTE
2026-030.5 FTE
2026-040.4 FTE
2026-050.4 FTE
2026-060.4 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Headcount

2 staff

2 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062 staff
2025-073 staff
2025-083 staff
2025-093 staff
2025-103 staff
2025-113 staff
2025-123 staff
2026-012 staff
2026-023 staff
2026-033 staff
2026-042 staff
2026-052 staff
2026-062 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Full-time equivalent

79.2 FTE

79.2 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 079.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0674.9 FTE
2025-0774.7 FTE
2025-0874 FTE
2025-0971.2 FTE
2025-1072.2 FTE
2025-1175.2 FTE
2025-1275.6 FTE
2026-0175.8 FTE
2026-0272.8 FTE
2026-0372.8 FTE
2026-0475.1 FTE
2026-0578.2 FTE
2026-0679.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Headcount

83 staff

83 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 083. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0679 staff
2025-0779 staff
2025-0878 staff
2025-0975 staff
2025-1076 staff
2025-1179 staff
2025-1280 staff
2026-0181 staff
2026-0278 staff
2026-0378 staff
2026-0479 staff
2026-0582 staff
2026-0683 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Full-time equivalent

146 FTE

146 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0155.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06144.3 FTE
2025-07143.3 FTE
2025-08153 FTE
2025-09155.1 FTE
2025-10152.8 FTE
2025-11152 FTE
2025-12154.4 FTE
2026-01154.5 FTE
2026-02151 FTE
2026-03151.7 FTE
2026-04149.5 FTE
2026-05148.7 FTE
2026-06146 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Headcount

151 staff

151 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0161. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06148 staff
2025-07147 staff
2025-08157 staff
2025-09161 staff
2025-10159 staff
2025-11158 staff
2025-12160 staff
2026-01160 staff
2026-02157 staff
2026-03157 staff
2026-04154 staff
2026-05154 staff
2026-06151 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Staff Grade: Full-time equivalent

1 FTE

1 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

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

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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

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

163.9 FTE

163.9 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0164.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06146.9 FTE
2025-07146.5 FTE
2025-08146.8 FTE
2025-09143.2 FTE
2025-10142.3 FTE
2025-11153.5 FTE
2025-12156.4 FTE
2026-01161.8 FTE
2026-02160.3 FTE
2026-03163.5 FTE
2026-04164.6 FTE
2026-05164.6 FTE
2026-06163.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Midwives: Headcount

200 staff

200 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0202. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06176 staff
2025-07177 staff
2025-08177 staff
2025-09173 staff
2025-10173 staff
2025-11187 staff
2025-12191 staff
2026-01197 staff
2026-02196 staff
2026-03200 staff
2026-04202 staff
2026-05202 staff
2026-06200 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Full-time equivalent

1,058.9 FTE

1,058.9 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,063.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,029.5 FTE
2025-071,021.4 FTE
2025-081,023.4 FTE
2025-091,025.2 FTE
2025-101,046.6 FTE
2025-111,048.8 FTE
2025-121,049.9 FTE
2026-011,063.5 FTE
2026-021,059.6 FTE
2026-031,053.5 FTE
2026-041,049.9 FTE
2026-051,050.6 FTE
2026-061,058.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Headcount

1,117 staff

1,117 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,125. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,096 staff
2025-071,087 staff
2025-081,089 staff
2025-091,091 staff
2025-101,113 staff
2025-111,115 staff
2025-121,113 staff
2026-011,125 staff
2026-021,122 staff
2026-031,113 staff
2026-041,109 staff
2026-051,109 staff
2026-061,117 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Full-time equivalent

334.7 FTE

334.7 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0334.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06307.6 FTE
2025-07308.6 FTE
2025-08304.1 FTE
2025-09310.5 FTE
2025-10320.9 FTE
2025-11324.7 FTE
2025-12328.1 FTE
2026-01333.6 FTE
2026-02326.9 FTE
2026-03328.9 FTE
2026-04326.9 FTE
2026-05328.7 FTE
2026-06334.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Headcount

376 staff

376 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0376. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06348 staff
2025-07349 staff
2025-08346 staff
2025-09351 staff
2025-10362 staff
2025-11366 staff
2025-12369 staff
2026-01375 staff
2026-02368 staff
2026-03369 staff
2026-04368 staff
2026-05370 staff
2026-06376 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

879.2 FTE

879.2 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0944. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06928.7 FTE
2025-07941.1 FTE
2025-08944 FTE
2025-09927.3 FTE
2025-10904.7 FTE
2025-11885.7 FTE
2025-12892.6 FTE
2026-01891.5 FTE
2026-02884.6 FTE
2026-03883.4 FTE
2026-04881 FTE
2026-05879.5 FTE
2026-06879.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Headcount

1,000 staff

1,000 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,069. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,053 staff
2025-071,066 staff
2025-081,069 staff
2025-091,051 staff
2025-101,028 staff
2025-111,004 staff
2025-121,012 staff
2026-011,010 staff
2026-021,004 staff
2026-031,002 staff
2026-041,000 staff
2026-05998 staff
2026-061,000 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Full-time equivalent

768.1 FTE

768.1 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0834.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06821.2 FTE
2025-07832.4 FTE
2025-08834.9 FTE
2025-09817.2 FTE
2025-10797.2 FTE
2025-11777.8 FTE
2025-12785 FTE
2026-01783.8 FTE
2026-02775.6 FTE
2026-03773.4 FTE
2026-04772.8 FTE
2026-05771.9 FTE
2026-06768.1 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Headcount

872 staff

872 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0947. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06933 staff
2025-07944 staff
2025-08947 staff
2025-09926 staff
2025-10905 staff
2025-11881 staff
2025-12889 staff
2026-01887 staff
2026-02879 staff
2026-03876 staff
2026-04876 staff
2026-05874 staff
2026-06872 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Full-time equivalent

111.1 FTE

111.1 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0111.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06107.5 FTE
2025-07108.7 FTE
2025-08109.2 FTE
2025-09110.1 FTE
2025-10107.5 FTE
2025-11107.9 FTE
2025-12107.6 FTE
2026-01107.7 FTE
2026-02108.9 FTE
2026-03109.9 FTE
2026-04108.2 FTE
2026-05107.6 FTE
2026-06111.1 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Headcount

128 staff

128 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: Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW). Publisher quality notes (each retains its affected period): DQ501 (2025-03-01 00:00:00): A decrease of 125 healthcare science and support staff at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust (RQW) who have transferred to a shared private provider of pathology services (Health Services Laboratories) for the three trusts in Hertfordshire and West Essex.

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0128. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06121 staff
2025-07123 staff
2025-08123 staff
2025-09126 staff
2025-10124 staff
2025-11123 staff
2025-12123 staff
2026-01123 staff
2026-02125 staff
2026-03126 staff
2026-04124 staff
2026-05124 staff
2026-06128 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

2 reported cases

2 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-073 reported cases
2025-086 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-105 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-016 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-035 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-064 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

3 reported cases

3 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-081 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-073 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-081 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases
Explore 34 additional measures

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

3 reported cases

3 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-074 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-104 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-014 reported cases
2026-023 reported cases
2026-038 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-073 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 015. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-078 reported cases
2025-0810 reported cases
2025-099 reported cases
2025-1012 reported cases
2025-116 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-0114 reported cases
2026-027 reported cases
2026-0315 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-058 reported cases
2026-067 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

17 reported cases

17 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 018. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0718 reported cases
2025-088 reported cases
2025-0914 reported cases
2025-1011 reported cases
2025-1112 reported cases
2025-128 reported cases
2026-0110 reported cases
2026-023 reported cases
2026-037 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-0513 reported cases
2026-068 reported cases
2026-0717 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

2 reported cases

2 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-082 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-114 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-016 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

4 reported cases

4 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 04. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-084 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-024 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-074 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

23 reported cases

23 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-0720 reported cases
2025-0814 reported cases
2025-0918 reported cases
2025-1014 reported cases
2025-1119 reported cases
2025-1211 reported cases
2026-0119 reported cases
2026-027 reported cases
2026-039 reported cases
2026-048 reported cases
2026-0515 reported cases
2026-069 reported cases
2026-0723 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

2 reported cases

2 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-074 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-094 reported cases
2025-101 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-126 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-023 reported cases
2026-035 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: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-101 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
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

3 reported cases

3 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-091 reported cases
2025-101 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-073 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

5 reported cases

5 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-078 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-095 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-114 reported cases
2025-127 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-024 reported cases
2026-035 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-075 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

1 reported cases

1 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-111 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-081 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: 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2026-010 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: 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-050 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

5 reported cases

5 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-074 reported cases
2025-086 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-025 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-044 reported cases
2026-054 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-075 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 04. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-104 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-071 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

7 reported cases

7 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 07. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-077 reported cases
2025-087 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-107 reported cases
2025-114 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-026 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-056 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-077 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

0 reported cases

0 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 04. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-084 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

2 reported cases

2 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-090 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
2026-041 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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
2025-081 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-121 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: 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 05. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-071 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-121 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 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: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL 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: No. Sign-off missing in these displayed months; completeness may be affected: 2026-07.

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

98.7%

98.7% 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

98.3%

98.3% 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

94%

94% 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

88.5%

88.5% 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

92.9%

92.9% 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

91.3%

91.3% 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

84.7%

84.7% 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

93.4%

93.4% 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

1,460 expected deaths

1,460 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: Within the expected range. Source unit: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RQW). Publisher flags elevated invalid primary diagnosis coding.

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Observed deaths in SHMI cohort

1,500 deaths

1,500 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: Within the expected range. Source unit: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RQW). Publisher flags elevated invalid primary diagnosis coding.

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator

1 ratio

1 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: Within the expected range. Source unit: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RQW). Publisher flags elevated invalid primary diagnosis coding.

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

44,140 spells

44,140 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: Within the expected range. Source unit: THE PRINCESS ALEXANDRA HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RQW). Publisher flags elevated invalid primary diagnosis coding.

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
Harlow
Funding information
NHS organisation — confirm the service’s funding
NHS organisation code
RQW
CQC identifier
RQW

CQC inspection evidence

Keep the publication date and assessed service in view. Ratings are reproduced as categories; they are not averaged into a score.

Ratings for specific services and population groups (1)
AssessmentRatingPublished
Well-led
Overall
Requires improvement26 August 2026

Service evidence

Connected organisations and services

Sources and coverage

Source changes may take time to appear here. Suggest a correction · Represent this provider