Investigation episodes reviewed
24
Sample data
Overall criteria compliance
89.7%
Target ≥ 90%
Results reviewed in time
70.8%
Within locally expected timeframe
Estimated bed days affected
46
Indicative, from recorded length-of-stay impact
Aim
To assess whether delayed investigations are recognised and managed reliably, and to measure the impact of investigation delays on clinical decision-making, treatment, discharge planning, length of stay and patient safety.
Standard
Local diagnostic requesting, prioritisation, reporting, result review and escalation standards (default local target ≥ 90%).
Sample
Target sample 60 investigation episodes across the wards, departments, specialties and pathways configured in Project setup. Pseudonymised data only — no direct patient identifiers.
Clinical purpose
Identify where investigation delays occur across the diagnostic journey.
Measure whether delays were recognised, escalated and documented.
Assess the impact on diagnosis, treatment, discharge, length of stay and safety.
Support targeted improvement work with diagnostic services, wards and patient flow teams.
Tool workflow
Step 1
Project setup
Confirm scope, wards, departments, specialties, pathways, leads and local policy references.
Step 2
Team
Add supervisors, contributors, diagnostics and governance leads.
Step 3
Inclusion / exclusion
Review who is in scope and the 28 audit criteria.
Step 4
Data collection
Structured form for each investigation episode.
Step 5
Dashboard
Compliance, delay stages, Pareto of reasons, impact and trends.
Step 6
Findings
Interpret results, good practice and gaps.
Step 7
Improvement
Actions, PDSA cycles, sustainability and re-audit plan.
Step 8
Resources
National guidance and local policy references.
Step 9
Export centre
Editable Word, PowerPoint, Excel and ARCP outputs.
Add an episode
Open the structured data collection form.
Plan improvement
Actions, PDSA cycles and re-audit plan.
Generate outputs
Word, PowerPoint, Excel and ARCP evidence.
Clinical safety note
This tool supports local audit, quality improvement and operational governance review. It does not replace clinical judgement, diagnostic pathways, escalation policies, radiology protocols, pathology protocols, specialist advice, discharge policy, criteria-to-reside review, emergency pathways or incident reporting. Any clinical deterioration, missed abnormal result, suspected serious diagnosis, unsafe discharge concern, delayed cancer or time-critical investigation concern, communication failure or patient safety concern must be escalated according to local policy. Do not enter patient names, NHS numbers, hospital numbers, full dates of birth, addresses or other direct identifiers.