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

NHS trusts · Shropshire

The Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust

Mytton Oak Road, Shrewsbury, SY3 8XQ

CQC: Requires improvementActive source recordOrganisation information

What can I learn about The Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust?

The recorded overall CQC rating is “Requires improvement”, dated 15 May 2024. 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

8 out of 10

8 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.88.7 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Being treated with respect and dignity

8.9 out of 10

8.9 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 out of 10

8 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: 268.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 08.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.9 out of 10
20218.1 out of 10
20227.7 out of 10
20237.8 out of 10
20248.3 out of 10
20258 out of 10
Explore 60 additional measures

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.5 out of 10

8.5 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: 143.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.48.8 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 08.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.7 out of 10
20258.5 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.

6 out of 10

6 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: 176.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 06.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.1 out of 10
20256 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

9.2 out of 10

9.2 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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
20209.3 out of 10
20219.3 out of 10
20229.3 out of 10
20239.4 out of 10
20249.2 out of 10
20259.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.3 out of 10

8.3 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: 404.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.4 out of 10
20218.3 out of 10
20228.2 out of 10
20237.9 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20258.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.9 out of 10

8.9 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: 447.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.79.4 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
20218.9 out of 10
20228.7 out of 10
20238.7 out of 10
20248.7 out of 10
20258.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.5 out of 10

8.5 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: 441.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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 08.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.4 out of 10
20218.2 out of 10
20228.4 out of 10
20238.2 out of 10
20248.4 out of 10
20258.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.29.1 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.8 out of 10
20218.7 out of 10
20228.6 out of 10
20238.4 out of 10
20248.6 out of 10
20258.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.9 out of 10

8.9 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: 449.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 09.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.1 out of 10
20218.9 out of 10
20228.8 out of 10
20238.7 out of 10
20248.9 out of 10
20258.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 445.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.8 out of 10
20218.5 out of 10
20228.6 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.6 out of 10
20258.7 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?

7.8 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 63.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20246.2 out of 10
20257.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.7 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 445.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 78.2 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
20207.6 out of 10
20216.9 out of 10
20227 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247.5 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.2 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 407.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.8 out of 10
20217.7 out of 10
20227.6 out of 10
20237.4 out of 10
20247.2 out of 10
20257.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.1 out of 10

7.1 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: 427.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.1 out of 10
20216.9 out of 10
20226.9 out of 10
20236.5 out of 10
20246.8 out of 10
20257.1 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.7 out of 10

8.7 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: 429.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.7 out of 10
20218.6 out of 10
20228.5 out of 10
20238.6 out of 10
20248.6 out of 10
20258.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.8 out of 10

7.8 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: 388.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.38.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 07.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.6 out of 10
20217.5 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247.4 out of 10
20257.8 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: 445.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 09.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.4 out of 10
20219.3 out of 10
20229.4 out of 10
20239.3 out of 10
20249.2 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 08.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.9 out of 10
20218.6 out of 10
20228.6 out of 10
20238.8 out of 10
20248.8 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?

8.3 out of 10

8.3 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 08.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.9 out of 10
20227.8 out of 10
20238 out of 10
20248.1 out of 10
20258.3 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)

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.49.3 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.19 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)

9.3 out of 10

9.3 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: 49.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: Better.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.89 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)

8.4 out of 10

8.4 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: 163.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.89.2 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)

8.1 out of 10

8.1 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: 137.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.28.6 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)

6 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 97.

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

6.3 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 57.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.68 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247.1 out of 10
20256.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.3 out of 10

6.3 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: 58.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 07. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247 out of 10
20256.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.1 out of 10

6.1 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: 422.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: 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 06.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.7 out of 10
20216.8 out of 10
20226.5 out of 10
20236 out of 10
20246.2 out of 10
20256.1 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?

5.2 out of 10

5.2 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: 305.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

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?

8 out of 10

8 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: 145.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 out of 10
20218.6 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20237.6 out of 10
20247.5 out of 10
20258 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: 442.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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
20217 out of 10
20226.4 out of 10
20236.3 out of 10
20246.5 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: 410.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 07.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20207.4 out of 10
20217.8 out of 10
20227.4 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247.4 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: 282.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20219 out of 10
20228.9 out of 10
20238.8 out of 10
20248.9 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?

5.8 out of 10

5.8 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: 265.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

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

4.1 out of 10

4.1 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: 323.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 04.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20204.4 out of 10
20214.5 out of 10
20223.7 out of 10
20233.7 out of 10
20244 out of 10
20254.1 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.

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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: 66.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20242025 · vertical scale 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20247 out of 10
20258.2 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.3 out of 10

6.3 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: 392.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 06.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20206.4 out of 10
20216.5 out of 10
20226.3 out of 10
20235.9 out of 10
20246.2 out of 10
20256.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.6 out of 10

7.6 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 6.98.5 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
20217.2 out of 10
20227 out of 10
20237.1 out of 10
20247.4 out of 10
20257.6 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.

7.4 out of 10

7.4 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: 215.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 08.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.7 out of 10
20227.3 out of 10
20237.7 out of 10
20247.7 out of 10
20257.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

5.9 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 246.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 05.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20245.9 out of 10
20255.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 443.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.69.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.7 out of 10
20248.7 out of 10
20258.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.9 out of 10

8.9 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: 439.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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 09.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20209.1 out of 10
20219 out of 10
20228.8 out of 10
20238.9 out of 10
20248.8 out of 10
20258.9 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.

8 out of 10

8 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: 443.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.88.7 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 out of 10
20227.9 out of 10
20237.7 out of 10
20247.7 out of 10
20258 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?

6.4 out of 10

6.4 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: 434.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.87.8 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
20206.8 out of 10
20216.1 out of 10
20225.5 out of 10
20235.7 out of 10
20245.6 out of 10
20256.4 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

6.5 out of 10

6.5 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: 440.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 06.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20236.6 out of 10
20246.3 out of 10
20256.5 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.7 out of 10

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 440.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: Worse.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.2 out of 10
20248.1 out of 10
20257.7 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

7.9 out of 10

7.9 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: 440.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: Somewhat worse.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 08.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20238.1 out of 10
20248.5 out of 10
20257.9 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 440.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 09.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20239.1 out of 10
20249 out of 10
20258.8 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

3.6 out of 10

3.6 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: 440.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20232025 · vertical scale 03.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20233 out of 10
20243.8 out of 10
20253.6 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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: 438.

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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
20219.1 out of 10
20229 out of 10
20238.9 out of 10
20248.8 out of 10
20258.8 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

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

8.3 out of 10

8.3 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: 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 7.68.9 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

20202025 · vertical scale 08.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
20208.1 out of 10
20217.7 out of 10
20227.7 out of 10
20237.9 out of 10
20247.9 out of 10
20258.3 out of 10

2025 survey NHS trust

Admission to hospital

7.5 out of 10

7.5 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

8.8 out of 10

8.8 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 8.69.4 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

The hospital and ward

7.2 out of 10

7.2 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

8 out of 10

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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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

8.6 out of 10

8.6 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

8.5 out of 10

8.5 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). Publisher comparison band: About the same.

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

8.2 out of 10

8.2 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 Shrewsbury And Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW). 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

2025 survey NHS trust

Virtual wards

6.3 out of 10

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Virtual wards

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

Publisher 95% expected range (not a confidence interval around this score): 5.98.2 out of 10.

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

2025 survey NHS trust

Leaving hospital

6.6 out of 10

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Leaving hospital

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

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

Adult inpatient survey: trust results · Coverage and method

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

Referral-to-treatment pathways

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

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

68%

Total

68% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 37,291 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 37,291; 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

37,291 waiting-list entries

Total

37,291 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

4,590 waiting-list entries

General Surgery Service

4,590 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 96 additional measures

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,058 waiting-list entries

Urology Service

2,058 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: 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

2,266 waiting-list entries

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

2,266 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

4,442 waiting-list entries

Ear Nose and Throat Service

4,442 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ear Nose and Throat Service: ongoing pathways

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

3,795 waiting-list entries

Ophthalmology Service

3,795 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

2,381 waiting-list entries

Oral Surgery Service

2,381 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

75 waiting-list entries

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiothoracic Surgery Service: ongoing pathways

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

1,218 waiting-list entries

General Internal Medicine Service

1,218 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

2,011 waiting-list entries

Gastroenterology Service

2,011 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

2,962 waiting-list entries

Cardiology Service

2,962 referral-to-treatment records were still open at the end of July 2026. One person may have more than one record.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Still on the waiting list

3,608 waiting-list entries

Dermatology Service

3,608 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

1,739 waiting-list entries

Respiratory Medicine Service

1,739 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

16 waiting-list entries

Neurology Service

16 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 waiting-list entries

Rheumatology Service

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

Definition and source

Published measure: 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

249 waiting-list entries

Elderly Medicine Service

249 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

4,232 waiting-list entries

Gynaecology Service

4,232 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

46 waiting-list entries

Other - Medical Services

46 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

812 waiting-list entries

Other - Paediatric Services

812 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

260 waiting-list entries

Other - Surgical Services

260 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

530 waiting-list entries

Other - Other Services

530 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

72.8%

General Surgery 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 4,590 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 4,590; 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

66.7%

Urology Service

66.7% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,058 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 2,058; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

44.6%

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

44.6% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,266 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 2,266; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

60.7%

Ear Nose and Throat Service

60.7% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,442 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 4,442; 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

74.4%

Ophthalmology Service

74.4% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 3,795 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,795; 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

49.3%

Oral Surgery Service

49.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,381 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,381; 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

89.3%

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

89.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 75 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 75; 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

87.3%

General Internal Medicine Service

87.3% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,218 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 1,218; 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

85.4%

Gastroenterology Service

85.4% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,011 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 2,011; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

71.7%

Cardiology Service

71.7% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 2,962 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 2,962; 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%

Dermatology 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 3,608 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,608; 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

64.8%

Respiratory Medicine Service

64.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 1,739 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 1,739; 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%

Neurology 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 16 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: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 16; 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%

Rheumatology Service

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

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways within 18 weeks

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

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

99.2%

Elderly Medicine Service

99.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 249 eligible waiting-list entries with a known start date.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 249; 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

61.8%

Gynaecology Service

61.8% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 4,232 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 4,232; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

100%

Other - Medical Services

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

Based on 46 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 46; 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

72.2%

Other - Paediatric Services

72.2% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 812 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 812; 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

78.9%

Other - Surgical Services

78.9% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 260 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 260; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 18 weeks or less

90.9%

Other - Other Services

90.9% of eligible open waiting-list records had already waited 18 weeks or less. This is time elapsed, not time left before treatment.

Based on 530 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 530; 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%

General Surgery Service

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

Based on 4,590 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,590; 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%

Urology Service

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

Based on 2,058 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Urology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,058; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

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

Based on 2,266 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,266; 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%

Ear Nose and Throat 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 4,442 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 4,442; 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%

Ophthalmology 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 3,795 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Ophthalmology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,795; 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%

Oral Surgery Service

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

Based on 2,381 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,381; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

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

Based on 75 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 75; 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 1,218 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,218; 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%

Gastroenterology Service

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

Based on 2,011 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gastroenterology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,011; 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%

Cardiology Service

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

Based on 2,962 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,962; 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%

Dermatology 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 3,608 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dermatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,608; 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 1,739 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,739; 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%

Neurology 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 16 eligible waiting-list entries. A small number of records can make this percentage change sharply; avoid drawing strong comparisons.

Definition and source

Published measure: Neurology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 16; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Rheumatology Service

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

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Rheumatology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

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

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

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 249 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 249; 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%

Gynaecology 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 4,232 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Gynaecology Service: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 4,232; 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%

Total

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

Based on 37,291 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total: ongoing pathways over 52 weeks

The calculation uses a denominator of 37,291; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Medical Services

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

Based on 46 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 46; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Paediatric Services

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

Based on 812 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 812; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Surgical Services

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

Based on 260 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 260; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting over a year

0%

Other - Other Services

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

Based on 530 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

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

The calculation uses a denominator of 530; 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

479 pathways

General Surgery Service

479 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

1,533 pathways

General Surgery Service

1,533 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

223 pathways

Urology Service

223 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

292 pathways

Urology Service

292 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

225 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

225 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

102 pathways

Trauma and Orthopaedic Service

102 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

113 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

113 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

850 pathways

Ear Nose and Throat Service

850 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

200 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

200 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

707 pathways

Ophthalmology Service

707 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

48 pathways

Oral Surgery Service

48 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

239 pathways

Oral Surgery Service

239 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

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service: completed non-admitted pathways

35 pathways

Cardiothoracic Surgery Service

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Cardiothoracic 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

49 pathways

General Internal Medicine Service

49 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

General Internal Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

652 pathways

General Internal Medicine Service

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

Definition and source

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

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Gastroenterology Service: completed admitted pathways

207 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

207 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

322 pathways

Gastroenterology Service

322 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

109 pathways

Cardiology Service

109 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

490 pathways

Cardiology Service

490 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

90 pathways

Dermatology Service

90 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

1,213 pathways

Dermatology Service

1,213 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

9 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

9 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

465 pathways

Respiratory Medicine Service

465 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

Elderly Medicine Service: completed non-admitted pathways

80 pathways

Elderly Medicine Service

80 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

201 pathways

Gynaecology Service

201 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

1,017 pathways

Gynaecology Service

1,017 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

1,965 pathways

Total

1,965 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

8,714 pathways

Total

8,714 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

4 pathways

Other - Medical Services

4 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

27 pathways

Other - Medical Services

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

Definition and source

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

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

Referral-to-treatment waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Other - Mental Health Services: completed admitted pathways

1 pathways

Other - Mental Health Services

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

Definition and source

Published measure: Other - Mental Health 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 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

393 pathways

Other - Paediatric Services

393 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 non-admitted pathways

44 pathways

Other - Surgical Services

44 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

5 pathways

Other - Other Services

5 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

253 pathways

Other - Other Services

253 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

1,727 waiting-list entries

1,727 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

501 waiting-list entries

501 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

1,887 waiting-list entries

1,887 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

702 waiting-list entries

702 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

1,741 waiting-list entries

1,741 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

266 waiting-list entries

266 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

425 waiting-list entries

425 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

2,213 waiting-list entries

2,213 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

5,906 waiting-list entries

5,906 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

27 waiting-list entries

27 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

389 waiting-list entries

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

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: patients on the reported waiting list

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

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

On the test waiting list

16,067 waiting-list entries

16,067 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

283 waiting-list entries

283 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

14.8%

14.8% 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 1,727 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: AUDIOLOGY_ASSESSMENTS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,727; 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

7.8%

7.8% 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 501 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: COLONOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 501; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

0.7%

0.7% 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 1,887 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: CT: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,887; 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

13.7%

13.7% 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 702 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: CYSTOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 702; 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

22.3%

22.3% 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 1,741 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 1,741; 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

11.3%

11.3% 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 266 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: FLEXI_SIGMOIDOSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 266; 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

6.8%

6.8% 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 425 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: GASTROSCOPY: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 425; 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

16.7%

16.7% 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 2,213 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRI: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 2,213; 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

30.9%

30.9% of eligible test waiting-list records had already waited six weeks or longer. It does not predict the remaining wait for your test.

Based on 5,906 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: NON_OBSTETRIC_ULTRASOUND: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 5,906; 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

55.6%

55.6% 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 27 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 27; 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

4.6%

4.6% 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 389 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 389; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Already waiting 6 weeks or longer

20.3%

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

Based on 16,067 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: TOTAL: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 16,067; 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

66.8%

66.8% 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 283 eligible waiting-list entries.

Definition and source

Published measure: URODYNAMICS: waiting six weeks or longer

The calculation uses a denominator of 283; 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

1,376 tests

1,376 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

683 tests

683 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

10,600 tests

10,600 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

495 tests

495 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

1,587 tests

1,587 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

132 tests

132 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

734 tests

734 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

4,424 tests

4,424 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

6,860 tests

6,860 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

9 tests

9 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

240 tests

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

Definition and source

Published measure: SLEEP_STUDIES: reported diagnostic activity

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

Diagnostic waiting times and activity · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Tests recorded during the month

27,167 tests

27,167 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

27 tests

27 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

86.6%

86.6% was reported for “Cancer faster diagnosis within 28 days”. July 2026 provisional provider-based statistics.

Definition and source

Published measure: Cancer faster diagnosis within 28 days

The calculation uses a denominator of 3,874; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Cancer waiting times · Coverage and method

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer treatment within 31 days of a decision to treat

98.1%

98.1% 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 737; 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

75.1%

75.1% 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 381.5; see the source for the eligible group.

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

Cancer waiting times · Coverage and method

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

Patient-reported hip and knee outcomes

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

Explore 105 additional measures

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

27 pairs

27 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

32 pairs

32 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

4 pairs

4 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

15 EQ VAS points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 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: RXW.

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

75.8 EQ VAS points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

70.1 EQ VAS points

70.1 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: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

52.8 EQ VAS points

52.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

17.3 EQ VAS points

17.3 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: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

24 pairs

24 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: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

31 pairs

31 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: 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: RXW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

7 pairs

7 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: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted health gain

20.1 Oxford Hip Score points

20.1 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

37.6 Oxford Hip Score points

37.6 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

35.3 Oxford Hip Score points

35.3 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

14.3 Oxford Hip Score points

14.3 Oxford Hip Score points was reported for “Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

21 Oxford Hip Score points

21 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

31 pairs

31 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Hip Replacement Primary · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

32 pairs

32 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.5 EQ-5D Index points

0.5 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

12 pairs

12 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

64 EQ VAS points

64 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

62.9 EQ VAS points

62.9 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

1.1 EQ VAS points

1.1 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

5 pairs

5 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

12 pairs

12 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2 pairs

2 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

5 pairs

5 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

35.9 Oxford Knee Score points

35.9 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

19.5 Oxford Knee Score points

19.5 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

16.4 Oxford Knee Score points

16.4 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Knee Replacement Primary · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.4 EQ-5D Index points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

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

Definition and source

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

Reported sample: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.5 EQ-5D Index points

0.5 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

27 pairs

27 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

32 pairs

32 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

4 pairs

4 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

15.7 EQ VAS points

15.7 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: RXW.

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

76.5 EQ VAS points

76.5 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

70.1 EQ VAS points

70.1 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

52.8 EQ VAS points

52.8 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

Reported sample: 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

17.3 EQ VAS points

17.3 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

24 pairs

24 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: RXW.

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: RXW.

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

0 pairs

0 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: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with deterioration

7 pairs

7 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: RXW.

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

21 Oxford Hip Score points

21 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Case-mix-adjusted postoperative score

38.6 Oxford Hip Score points

38.6 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

35.3 Oxford Hip Score points

35.3 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

14.3 Oxford Hip Score points

14.3 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Unadjusted health gain

21 Oxford Hip Score points

21 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

31 pairs

31 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Hip Replacement · Oxford Hip Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

32 pairs

32 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

1 pairs

1 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: 32.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.7 EQ-5D Index points

0.7 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.5 EQ-5D Index points

0.5 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

0.2 EQ-5D Index points

0.2 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

12 pairs

12 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

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

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted postoperative score

64 EQ VAS points

64 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted preoperative score

62.9 EQ VAS points

62.9 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

1.1 EQ VAS points

1.1 EQ VAS points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Unadjusted health gain

Reported sample: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Questionnaire pairs with improvement

5 pairs

5 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · EQ VAS: Modelled questionnaire pairs

12 pairs

12 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2 pairs

2 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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 12.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

35.9 Oxford Knee Score points

35.9 Oxford Knee Score points was reported for “Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score”. Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025.

Definition and source

Published measure: Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted postoperative score

Reported sample: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted preoperative score

19.5 Oxford Knee Score points

19.5 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Unadjusted health gain

16.4 Oxford Knee Score points

16.4 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

2024/25 reporting provider

Total Knee Replacement · Oxford Knee Score: Modelled questionnaire pairs

14 pairs

14 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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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: 14.

Published NHS-funded hip or knee replacement questionnaire aggregates for April 2024–March 2025. Primary and revision procedures and the different questionnaires are separate cohorts. Results describe respondents with modelled questionnaire pairs, not every surgical patient or a personal prediction. Adjusted scores account for measured case mix; small differences do not establish statistically significant differences. Case-mix-adjusted results are withheld below 30 modelled pairs. Negative health gains and EQ-5D scores can be valid. Source reporting code: RXW.

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

20.5%

20.5% 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
2026-0416.5%
2026-0516.2%
2026-0618.9%
2026-0720.5%

July 2026 NHS reporting provider

A&E 4 hour performance

62.4%

62.4% 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
2026-0465.1%
2026-0562.5%
2026-0661.5%
2026-0762.4%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 31 Day Treatment Standard

98%

98% 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
2025-0687.9%
2025-0794.7%
2025-0891.6%
2025-0994.2%
2025-1096.2%
2025-1195.5%
2025-1298%
2026-0196.2%
2026-0299.2%
2026-0397.6%
2026-0496.4%
2026-0598.6%
2026-0698%
Explore 5 additional measures

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer 62 Day Combined Performance

74.5%

74.5% 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
2025-0662.9%
2025-0766.9%
2025-0868.9%
2025-0965.2%
2025-1071.4%
2025-1170.2%
2025-1270.1%
2026-0168.3%
2026-0275%
2026-0374.5%
2026-0471.2%
2026-0573.9%
2026-0674.5%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Cancer Faster Diagnostic Standard

85.8%

85.8% 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
2025-0672.5%
2025-0775.5%
2025-0875.9%
2025-0980.1%
2025-1080.3%
2025-1185.7%
2025-1283%
2026-0180.2%
2026-0285.5%
2026-0386%
2026-0480.9%
2026-0582.5%
2026-0685.8%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Diagnostics proportion waiting over 6 weeks

20.4%

20.4% 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
2025-0617.7%
2025-0716.6%
2025-0818%
2025-0914.7%
2025-1013.1%
2025-1113.6%
2025-1218.6%
2026-0119.7%
2026-0213.6%
2026-0313.8%
2026-0417.6%
2026-0517.9%
2026-0620.4%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Percentage waiting more than 52 weeks for elective treatment

0%

0% 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
2025-061.9%
2025-071.3%
2025-080.9%
2025-090.4%
2025-100.3%
2025-110.2%
2025-120.1%
2026-010.1%
2026-020.1%
2026-030%
2026-040%
2026-050%
2026-060%

June 2026 NHS reporting provider

Percentage waiting within 18 weeks for elective treatment

69.7%

69.7% 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
2025-0654.9%
2025-0756.4%
2025-0858.8%
2025-0962.3%
2025-1064%
2025-1165.5%
2025-1264.1%
2026-0162.9%
2026-0263.1%
2026-0368.9%
2026-0469.1%
2026-0569.9%
2026-0669.7%

Hospital and community workforce

Reported staff capacity across the organisation and its services.

June 2026 reporting organisation

All staff groups: Full-time equivalent

7,364.4 FTE

7,364.4 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 07,364.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-067,069.6 FTE
2025-077,059.7 FTE
2025-087,138.4 FTE
2025-097,233.7 FTE
2025-107,259.3 FTE
2025-117,299.9 FTE
2025-127,271.3 FTE
2026-017,309.9 FTE
2026-027,292.8 FTE
2026-037,303.8 FTE
2026-047,301.8 FTE
2026-057,331.4 FTE
2026-067,364.4 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

All staff groups: Headcount

8,387 staff

8,387 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 08,387. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-068,090 staff
2025-078,080 staff
2025-088,158 staff
2025-098,249 staff
2025-108,278 staff
2025-118,314 staff
2025-128,281 staff
2026-018,327 staff
2026-028,306 staff
2026-038,317 staff
2026-048,325 staff
2026-058,353 staff
2026-068,387 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Full-time equivalent

1,036.2 FTE

1,036.2 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,076.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,076.3 FTE
2025-071,068.7 FTE
2025-081,064.5 FTE
2025-091,065.2 FTE
2025-101,066 FTE
2025-111,059.1 FTE
2025-121,039.7 FTE
2026-011,043.4 FTE
2026-021,043.8 FTE
2026-031,034.1 FTE
2026-041,027.7 FTE
2026-051,024.1 FTE
2026-061,036.2 FTE
Explore 43 additional measures

June 2026 reporting organisation

NHS infrastructure support: Headcount

1,193 staff

1,193 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,235. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,235 staff
2025-071,228 staff
2025-081,223 staff
2025-091,223 staff
2025-101,225 staff
2025-111,216 staff
2025-121,196 staff
2026-011,202 staff
2026-021,203 staff
2026-031,192 staff
2026-041,186 staff
2026-051,180 staff
2026-061,193 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Full-time equivalent

469.8 FTE

469.8 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0499.5. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06499.5 FTE
2025-07494.1 FTE
2025-08493.1 FTE
2025-09491 FTE
2025-10489.2 FTE
2025-11484.4 FTE
2025-12468.2 FTE
2026-01469.6 FTE
2026-02468.9 FTE
2026-03463.1 FTE
2026-04464.2 FTE
2026-05461.5 FTE
2026-06469.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Central functions: Headcount

516 staff

516 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0546. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06546 staff
2025-07542 staff
2025-08541 staff
2025-09540 staff
2025-10538 staff
2025-11532 staff
2025-12514 staff
2026-01516 staff
2026-02515 staff
2026-03509 staff
2026-04510 staff
2026-05508 staff
2026-06516 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent

397.2 FTE

397.2 FTE was reported for “Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent”. NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records.

Definition and source

Published measure: Hotel, property & estates: Full-time equivalent

NHS Hospital and Community Health Services workforce from payroll records. Excludes primary care and providers outside the collection. Headcount and full-time equivalent are distinct measures. Subgroups overlap with published totals and must not be added together. Organisation-wide staffing is not site staffing, an appointment count or a staffing-to-patient ratio. Changes can reflect transfers and coding. Source organisation: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0409.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06409.6 FTE
2025-07407.4 FTE
2025-08405.3 FTE
2025-09406.7 FTE
2025-10405.5 FTE
2025-11403.3 FTE
2025-12402.1 FTE
2026-01407.6 FTE
2026-02406.7 FTE
2026-03402.8 FTE
2026-04396.5 FTE
2026-05395.3 FTE
2026-06397.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Hotel, property & estates: Headcount

504 staff

504 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0518. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06518 staff
2025-07515 staff
2025-08512 staff
2025-09512 staff
2025-10512 staff
2025-11509 staff
2025-12509 staff
2026-01516 staff
2026-02516 staff
2026-03511 staff
2026-04505 staff
2026-05501 staff
2026-06504 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Full-time equivalent

96.2 FTE

96.2 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0102.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0695.7 FTE
2025-0795.7 FTE
2025-0895.7 FTE
2025-0996 FTE
2025-10101.1 FTE
2025-11102.1 FTE
2025-12100 FTE
2026-0198 FTE
2026-0299.2 FTE
2026-0397.2 FTE
2026-0497 FTE
2026-0595.2 FTE
2026-0696.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Managers: Headcount

99 staff

99 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0105. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0699 staff
2025-0799 staff
2025-0899 staff
2025-0999 staff
2025-10104 staff
2025-11105 staff
2025-12103 staff
2026-01101 staff
2026-02102 staff
2026-03100 staff
2026-04100 staff
2026-0598 staff
2026-0699 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Full-time equivalent

73.1 FTE

73.1 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 073.1. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0671.5 FTE
2025-0771.5 FTE
2025-0870.5 FTE
2025-0971.5 FTE
2025-1070.3 FTE
2025-1169.3 FTE
2025-1269.3 FTE
2026-0168.2 FTE
2026-0269 FTE
2026-0371 FTE
2026-0470 FTE
2026-0572.1 FTE
2026-0673.1 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Senior managers: Headcount

75 staff

75 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 075. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0673 staff
2025-0773 staff
2025-0872 staff
2025-0973 staff
2025-1072 staff
2025-1171 staff
2025-1271 staff
2026-0170 staff
2026-0271 staff
2026-0373 staff
2026-0472 staff
2026-0574 staff
2026-0675 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

3,965.2 FTE

3,965.2 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 03,965.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-063,680.3 FTE
2025-073,661.8 FTE
2025-083,751.1 FTE
2025-093,822.1 FTE
2025-103,871.3 FTE
2025-113,908.3 FTE
2025-123,906 FTE
2026-013,940 FTE
2026-023,947.6 FTE
2026-033,951.6 FTE
2026-043,944.1 FTE
2026-053,964.9 FTE
2026-063,965.2 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Professionally qualified clinical staff: Headcount

4,416 staff

4,416 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 04,416. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-064,121 staff
2025-074,103 staff
2025-084,192 staff
2025-094,265 staff
2025-104,315 staff
2025-114,349 staff
2025-124,349 staff
2026-014,385 staff
2026-024,390 staff
2026-034,397 staff
2026-044,391 staff
2026-054,416 staff
2026-064,416 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Full-time equivalent

4.3 FTE

4.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 04.8. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-063.8 FTE
2025-073.8 FTE
2025-084.8 FTE
2025-094.8 FTE
2025-103.8 FTE
2025-113.8 FTE
2025-123.8 FTE
2026-013.8 FTE
2026-023.8 FTE
2026-033.8 FTE
2026-044.3 FTE
2026-054.3 FTE
2026-064.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Ambulance staff: Headcount

6 staff

6 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

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

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-065 staff
2025-075 staff
2025-086 staff
2025-096 staff
2025-105 staff
2025-115 staff
2025-125 staff
2026-015 staff
2026-025 staff
2026-035 staff
2026-046 staff
2026-056 staff
2026-066 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Full-time equivalent

974.8 FTE

974.8 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0978.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06888.3 FTE
2025-07876.3 FTE
2025-08933.5 FTE
2025-09958.3 FTE
2025-10969.6 FTE
2025-11968.2 FTE
2025-12965.5 FTE
2026-01971 FTE
2026-02975.6 FTE
2026-03972.1 FTE
2026-04975.7 FTE
2026-05978.6 FTE
2026-06974.8 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - All grades: Headcount

1,015 staff

1,015 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,019. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06925 staff
2025-07913 staff
2025-08971 staff
2025-09998 staff
2025-101,009 staff
2025-111,005 staff
2025-121,004 staff
2026-011,011 staff
2026-021,016 staff
2026-031,014 staff
2026-041,016 staff
2026-051,019 staff
2026-061,015 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Full-time equivalent

43.3 FTE

43.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 045. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0640.4 FTE
2025-0740.3 FTE
2025-0842.3 FTE
2025-0942.2 FTE
2025-1043 FTE
2025-1145 FTE
2025-1245 FTE
2026-0145 FTE
2026-0244 FTE
2026-0344.2 FTE
2026-0444.4 FTE
2026-0543.3 FTE
2026-0643.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Associate Specialist: Headcount

45 staff

45 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 046. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0641 staff
2025-0741 staff
2025-0843 staff
2025-0943 staff
2025-1044 staff
2025-1146 staff
2025-1246 staff
2026-0146 staff
2026-0245 staff
2026-0346 staff
2026-0446 staff
2026-0545 staff
2026-0645 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Full-time equivalent

322.3 FTE

322.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0325.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06295.7 FTE
2025-07294.8 FTE
2025-08300 FTE
2025-09307.7 FTE
2025-10308.9 FTE
2025-11307.2 FTE
2025-12310.4 FTE
2026-01313.2 FTE
2026-02317.7 FTE
2026-03318.4 FTE
2026-04320.4 FTE
2026-05325.2 FTE
2026-06322.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Consultant: Headcount

342 staff

342 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0345. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06316 staff
2025-07315 staff
2025-08320 staff
2025-09329 staff
2025-10330 staff
2025-11327 staff
2025-12331 staff
2026-01335 staff
2026-02339 staff
2026-03341 staff
2026-04341 staff
2026-05345 staff
2026-06342 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Full-time equivalent

244.7 FTE

244.7 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0247.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06201.5 FTE
2025-07189.7 FTE
2025-08208.4 FTE
2025-09226.3 FTE
2025-10231.2 FTE
2025-11232.2 FTE
2025-12247.4 FTE
2026-01246.4 FTE
2026-02243.3 FTE
2026-03238.5 FTE
2026-04243.4 FTE
2026-05244.2 FTE
2026-06244.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Core Training: Headcount

251 staff

251 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0253. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06205 staff
2025-07193 staff
2025-08213 staff
2025-09231 staff
2025-10236 staff
2025-11237 staff
2025-12253 staff
2026-01252 staff
2026-02249 staff
2026-03244 staff
2026-04250 staff
2026-05251 staff
2026-06251 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

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

79.7 FTE

79.7 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 080. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0679 FTE
2025-0778 FTE
2025-0880 FTE
2025-0980 FTE
2025-1080 FTE
2025-1180 FTE
2025-1280 FTE
2026-0180 FTE
2026-0280 FTE
2026-0380 FTE
2026-0479.7 FTE
2026-0579.7 FTE
2026-0679.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 1: Headcount

80 staff

80 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 080. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0679 staff
2025-0778 staff
2025-0880 staff
2025-0980 staff
2025-1080 staff
2025-1180 staff
2025-1280 staff
2026-0180 staff
2026-0280 staff
2026-0380 staff
2026-0480 staff
2026-0580 staff
2026-0680 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

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

53.4 FTE

53.4 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 065.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0645.5 FTE
2025-0746.5 FTE
2025-0865.7 FTE
2025-0964.7 FTE
2025-1063.7 FTE
2025-1162.7 FTE
2025-1258.4 FTE
2026-0158.4 FTE
2026-0260.4 FTE
2026-0360.4 FTE
2026-0454.4 FTE
2026-0553.4 FTE
2026-0653.4 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Foundation Doctor Year 2: Headcount

54 staff

54 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 066. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0646 staff
2025-0747 staff
2025-0866 staff
2025-0965 staff
2025-1064 staff
2025-1163 staff
2025-1259 staff
2026-0159 staff
2026-0261 staff
2026-0361 staff
2026-0455 staff
2026-0554 staff
2026-0654 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

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

5.9 FTE

5.9 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 06.2. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-064.8 FTE
2025-074.8 FTE
2025-084.1 FTE
2025-093.6 FTE
2025-104.2 FTE
2025-113.7 FTE
2025-124.2 FTE
2026-015.4 FTE
2026-025.4 FTE
2026-036.2 FTE
2026-046.2 FTE
2026-056.1 FTE
2026-065.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Hospital Practitioner / Clinical Assistant: Headcount

9 staff

9 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 09. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-068 staff
2025-078 staff
2025-087 staff
2025-097 staff
2025-107 staff
2025-116 staff
2025-127 staff
2026-018 staff
2026-028 staff
2026-039 staff
2026-049 staff
2026-059 staff
2026-069 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Full-time equivalent

104.9 FTE

104.9 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

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
2025-06102.5 FTE
2025-07103.5 FTE
2025-08104.5 FTE
2025-09104.3 FTE
2025-10105.2 FTE
2025-11105.5 FTE
2025-12102.2 FTE
2026-01103.8 FTE
2026-02103.5 FTE
2026-03106.5 FTE
2026-04105.5 FTE
2026-05105.9 FTE
2026-06104.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Doctor: Headcount

109 staff

109 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0110. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06106 staff
2025-07107 staff
2025-08108 staff
2025-09108 staff
2025-10109 staff
2025-11109 staff
2025-12105 staff
2026-01107 staff
2026-02107 staff
2026-03110 staff
2026-04109 staff
2026-05110 staff
2026-06109 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Full-time equivalent

120.6 FTE

120.6 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0133.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06119 FTE
2025-07118.8 FTE
2025-08128.6 FTE
2025-09129.5 FTE
2025-10133.4 FTE
2025-11132 FTE
2025-12118 FTE
2026-01118.8 FTE
2026-02121.2 FTE
2026-03117.9 FTE
2026-04121.8 FTE
2026-05120.8 FTE
2026-06120.6 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

HCHS doctors - Specialty Registrar: Headcount

125 staff

125 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0139. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06124 staff
2025-07124 staff
2025-08134 staff
2025-09135 staff
2025-10139 staff
2025-11137 staff
2025-12123 staff
2026-01124 staff
2026-02127 staff
2026-03123 staff
2026-04126 staff
2026-05125 staff
2026-06125 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Midwives: Full-time equivalent

218.4 FTE

218.4 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0227.4. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06225.7 FTE
2025-07224.7 FTE
2025-08225.8 FTE
2025-09225.5 FTE
2025-10224.9 FTE
2025-11223.9 FTE
2025-12220.5 FTE
2026-01226.1 FTE
2026-02227.4 FTE
2026-03223.4 FTE
2026-04222.2 FTE
2026-05219.3 FTE
2026-06218.4 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Midwives: Headcount

271 staff

271 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0281. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06278 staff
2025-07279 staff
2025-08279 staff
2025-09279 staff
2025-10278 staff
2025-11277 staff
2025-12273 staff
2026-01279 staff
2026-02281 staff
2026-03277 staff
2026-04275 staff
2026-05272 staff
2026-06271 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Full-time equivalent

1,931.3 FTE

1,931.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,931.3. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,815.4 FTE
2025-071,807 FTE
2025-081,830 FTE
2025-091,857.6 FTE
2025-101,888.7 FTE
2025-111,907.8 FTE
2025-121,910.6 FTE
2026-011,928.3 FTE
2026-021,926 FTE
2026-031,927.9 FTE
2026-041,914.3 FTE
2026-051,926.1 FTE
2026-061,931.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Nurses & health visitors: Headcount

2,178 staff

2,178 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,178. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,056 staff
2025-072,046 staff
2025-082,069 staff
2025-092,097 staff
2025-102,129 staff
2025-112,147 staff
2025-122,151 staff
2026-012,169 staff
2026-022,163 staff
2026-032,166 staff
2026-042,156 staff
2026-052,172 staff
2026-062,178 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Full-time equivalent

836.3 FTE

836.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0836.6. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06747.1 FTE
2025-07750 FTE
2025-08757 FTE
2025-09775.8 FTE
2025-10784.2 FTE
2025-11804.5 FTE
2025-12805.7 FTE
2026-01810.8 FTE
2026-02814.8 FTE
2026-03824.3 FTE
2026-04827.7 FTE
2026-05836.6 FTE
2026-06836.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Scientific, therapeutic & technical staff: Headcount

948 staff

948 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0949. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06858 staff
2025-07862 staff
2025-08867 staff
2025-09885 staff
2025-10894 staff
2025-11915 staff
2025-12916 staff
2026-01922 staff
2026-02926 staff
2026-03937 staff
2026-04940 staff
2026-05949 staff
2026-06948 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Full-time equivalent

2,362.9 FTE

2,362.9 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,362.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,313 FTE
2025-072,329.2 FTE
2025-082,322.8 FTE
2025-092,346.5 FTE
2025-102,322 FTE
2025-112,332.5 FTE
2025-122,325.6 FTE
2026-012,326.4 FTE
2026-022,301.4 FTE
2026-032,318.1 FTE
2026-042,330 FTE
2026-052,342.4 FTE
2026-062,362.9 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to clinical staff: Headcount

2,782 staff

2,782 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,782. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,738 staff
2025-072,753 staff
2025-082,747 staff
2025-092,765 staff
2025-102,742 staff
2025-112,754 staff
2025-122,741 staff
2026-012,745 staff
2026-022,717 staff
2026-032,732 staff
2026-042,752 staff
2026-052,761 staff
2026-062,782 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

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

1,868.7 FTE

1,868.7 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 01,868.7. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-061,813.7 FTE
2025-071,826.3 FTE
2025-081,827.6 FTE
2025-091,843.9 FTE
2025-101,823.7 FTE
2025-111,838 FTE
2025-121,827 FTE
2026-011,828.5 FTE
2026-021,813.7 FTE
2026-031,831.5 FTE
2026-041,843.6 FTE
2026-051,851 FTE
2026-061,868.7 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to doctors, nurses & midwives: Headcount

2,199 staff

2,199 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 02,199. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-062,152 staff
2025-072,163 staff
2025-082,165 staff
2025-092,176 staff
2025-102,156 staff
2025-112,172 staff
2025-122,155 staff
2026-012,160 staff
2026-022,143 staff
2026-032,158 staff
2026-042,179 staff
2026-052,182 staff
2026-062,199 staff

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Full-time equivalent

494.3 FTE

494.3 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0502.9. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06499.2 FTE
2025-07502.9 FTE
2025-08495.2 FTE
2025-09502.6 FTE
2025-10498.3 FTE
2025-11494.5 FTE
2025-12498.6 FTE
2026-01498 FTE
2026-02487.7 FTE
2026-03486.6 FTE
2026-04486.4 FTE
2026-05491.4 FTE
2026-06494.3 FTE

June 2026 reporting organisation

Support to ST&T staff: Headcount

587 staff

587 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: Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust (RXW).

Hospital and Community Health Services workforce · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-062026-06 · vertical scale 0592. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-06589 staff
2025-07592 staff
2025-08584 staff
2025-09591 staff
2025-10587 staff
2025-11584 staff
2025-12588 staff
2026-01587 staff
2026-02577 staff
2026-03577 staff
2026-04577 staff
2026-05583 staff
2026-06587 staff

For your decision These numbers do not show the staffing of a particular ward or appointment.

Infection surveillance: historical context

Historical reported infections, with surveillance definitions and reporting coverage.

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated

3 reported cases

3 reported cases was reported for “C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: C. difficile: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 06. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-072 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-104 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-035 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-054 reported cases
2026-066 reported cases
2026-073 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

9 reported cases

9 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 010. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-075 reported cases
2025-083 reported cases
2025-094 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-127 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-026 reported cases
2026-039 reported cases
2026-044 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-0610 reported cases
2026-079 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Community-onset, indeterminate-association

2 reported cases

2 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-070 reported cases
2025-083 reported cases
2025-093 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-045 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-072 reported cases
Explore 34 additional measures

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

10 reported cases

10 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 010. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-075 reported cases
2025-0810 reported cases
2025-098 reported cases
2025-106 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-128 reported cases
2026-016 reported cases
2026-023 reported cases
2026-039 reported cases
2026-046 reported cases
2026-0510 reported cases
2026-0610 reported cases
2026-0710 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

C. difficile: Total cases

24 reported cases

24 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 029. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0712 reported cases
2025-0818 reported cases
2025-0918 reported cases
2025-1016 reported cases
2025-119 reported cases
2025-1217 reported cases
2026-0115 reported cases
2026-029 reported cases
2026-0324 reported cases
2026-0420 reported cases
2026-0517 reported cases
2026-0629 reported cases
2026-0724 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Community-onset, community-associated

25 reported cases

25 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 032. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0732 reported cases
2025-0824 reported cases
2025-0921 reported cases
2025-1030 reported cases
2025-1121 reported cases
2025-1220 reported cases
2026-0121 reported cases
2026-0210 reported cases
2026-0322 reported cases
2026-0422 reported cases
2026-0516 reported cases
2026-0614 reported cases
2026-0725 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

11 reported cases

11 reported cases was reported for “E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: E. coli: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 014. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0710 reported cases
2025-0810 reported cases
2025-0914 reported cases
2025-1011 reported cases
2025-1110 reported cases
2025-127 reported cases
2026-019 reported cases
2026-026 reported cases
2026-036 reported cases
2026-047 reported cases
2026-059 reported cases
2026-068 reported cases
2026-0711 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

6 reported cases

6 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 08. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-072 reported cases
2025-088 reported cases
2025-097 reported cases
2025-105 reported cases
2025-115 reported cases
2025-125 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-025 reported cases
2026-037 reported cases
2026-048 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-064 reported cases
2026-076 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

E. coli: Total cases

42 reported cases

42 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 046. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0744 reported cases
2025-0842 reported cases
2025-0942 reported cases
2025-1046 reported cases
2025-1136 reported cases
2025-1232 reported cases
2026-0135 reported cases
2026-0221 reported cases
2026-0335 reported cases
2026-0437 reported cases
2026-0528 reported cases
2026-0626 reported cases
2026-0742 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, community-associated

7 reported cases

7 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 010. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-075 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-0910 reported cases
2025-105 reported cases
2025-115 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-014 reported cases
2026-025 reported cases
2026-038 reported cases
2026-048 reported cases
2026-057 reported cases
2026-064 reported cases
2026-077 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

5 reported cases

5 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-094 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-033 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-054 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-075 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-072 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-094 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-122 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-071 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Klebsiella spp: Total cases

13 reported cases

13 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

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

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-078 reported cases
2025-0811 reported cases
2025-0918 reported cases
2025-1010 reported cases
2025-119 reported cases
2025-127 reported cases
2026-019 reported cases
2026-028 reported cases
2026-0311 reported cases
2026-048 reported cases
2026-0512 reported cases
2026-068 reported cases
2026-0713 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: MRSA: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 02. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 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
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 02. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-021 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MRSA: Total cases

0 reported cases

0 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 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
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Community-onset, community-associated

7 reported cases

7 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 010. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-075 reported cases
2025-084 reported cases
2025-099 reported cases
2025-107 reported cases
2025-115 reported cases
2025-125 reported cases
2026-014 reported cases
2026-029 reported cases
2026-036 reported cases
2026-0410 reported cases
2026-057 reported cases
2026-065 reported cases
2026-077 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

0 reported cases

0 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-073 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-103 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-064 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

4 reported cases

4 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-072 reported cases
2025-082 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-011 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-034 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-052 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-074 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

MSSA: Total cases

11 reported cases

11 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

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

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-0710 reported cases
2025-0811 reported cases
2025-0911 reported cases
2025-1010 reported cases
2025-118 reported cases
2025-1211 reported cases
2026-018 reported cases
2026-0212 reported cases
2026-0311 reported cases
2026-0415 reported cases
2026-0510 reported cases
2026-0612 reported cases
2026-0711 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, community-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

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
2025-074 reported cases
2025-084 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-112 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-013 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-032 reported cases
2026-042 reported cases
2026-053 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Community-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 03. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-073 reported cases
2025-081 reported cases
2025-091 reported cases
2025-102 reported cases
2025-111 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-012 reported cases
2026-022 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-062 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

1 reported cases

1 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Hospital-onset, healthcare-associated

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-101 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-021 reported cases
2026-031 reported cases
2026-041 reported cases
2026-051 reported cases
2026-061 reported cases
2026-071 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information

0 reported cases

0 reported cases was reported for “Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information”. Historical laboratory-reported infection count.

Definition and source

Published measure: Pseudomonas aeruginosa: No information

Historical laboratory-reported infection count. The reporting trust processes the specimen and may not be where infection was acquired. UKHSA explicitly says these unadjusted counts are not a basis for comparisons between trusts or conclusions about infection-control effectiveness. Differences in population, case mix and hospital activity are not adjusted. Total and onset categories overlap; do not add them together. Extracted 17 August 2026; figures may be revised. Source reporting unit: THE SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. No information: the reporting trust did not provide any answer for questions on prior admission. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

July 2026 NHS acute trust

Pseudomonas aeruginosa: Total cases

3 reported cases

3 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST. Latest month signed off by trust: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

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

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-077 reported cases
2025-085 reported cases
2025-092 reported cases
2025-105 reported cases
2025-113 reported cases
2025-123 reported cases
2026-015 reported cases
2026-024 reported cases
2026-033 reported cases
2026-043 reported cases
2026-055 reported cases
2026-063 reported cases
2026-073 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD 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: Yes.

Laboratory-reported healthcare-associated infections · Coverage and method

See how this has changed

2025-072026-07 · vertical scale 01. Gaps remain gaps.

Read the values by period
PeriodPublished value
2025-070 reported cases
2025-080 reported cases
2025-090 reported cases
2025-100 reported cases
2025-110 reported cases
2025-120 reported cases
2026-010 reported cases
2026-020 reported cases
2026-030 reported cases
2026-040 reported cases
2026-050 reported cases
2026-060 reported cases
2026-070 reported cases

For your decision Raw counts cannot rank hospitals with different sizes and patient groups.

National infection context and why counts cannot rank hospitals

Organisation environment: PLACE assessments

Environment assessments reported across an organisation, potentially covering several sites.

2025 reporting organisation

Cleanliness assessment

99.5%

99.5% 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

98.6%

98.6% 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

85.1%

85.1% was reported for “Dementia assessment”. 2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit.

Definition and source

Published measure: Dementia assessment

2025 patient-led assessment of the non-clinical environment; not a clinical outcome or a current accessibility audit. Assessments involve staff and patient assessors and include judgement. Participation is voluntary and coverage differs. Check present-day facilities directly before travelling. Organisation results are weighted by the beds in participating sites; they are not individual site scores.

PLACE: organisation environment assessments · Coverage and method

Explore 5 additional measures

2025 reporting organisation

Disability assessment

84.6%

84.6% 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

79.2%

79.2% 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

78.5%

78.5% 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

79.1%

79.1% 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

80.2%

80.2% 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

2,965 expected deaths

2,965 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RXW).

Summary Hospital-level Mortality Indicator · Coverage and method

May 2025–April 2026 NHS trust

Observed deaths in SHMI cohort

2,825 deaths

2,825 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RXW).

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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RXW).

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

82,395 spells

82,395 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 SHREWSBURY AND TELFORD HOSPITAL NHS TRUST (RXW).

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
Shropshire
Funding information
NHS organisation — confirm the service’s funding
NHS organisation code
RXW
CQC identifier
RXW

CQC inspection evidence

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

AssessmentRatingPublished
CaringGood15 May 2024
Combined Quality RatingInadequate29 November 2018
EffectiveRequires improvement15 May 2024
OverallRequires improvement15 May 2024
ResponsiveRequires improvement15 May 2024
SafeRequires improvement15 May 2024
Use of ResourcesRequires improvement29 November 2018
Well-ledRequires improvement15 May 2024

Service evidence

Connected organisations and services

Sources and coverage

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