Here we showcase examples of best practice from NHS trusts that have successfully used audit insights to drive measurable improvements in their data quality.
These real‑world examples highlight practical approaches, lessons learned, and replicable methods which other trusts can use as a reference when considering their own quality improvement approaches.
By sharing these stories, we aim to support trusts in adopting effective, evidence‑based improvements that strengthen the quality of National audit data.
In the short film below, Data Liaison Manager, Simon Cairns, from the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS), shares details of how colleagues based at the NDRS successfully collaborated with Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, to effectively enhance their data quality.
Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has been taking practical steps to improve the completeness of lymphoma staging data recorded locally, to support more complete audit submissions over time.
The issues identified locally
Dr Graham Collins, Consultant Haematologist and Lymphoma Lead at Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust noted that the trust’s main issue was poor data returns.
A key learning for the team was gaining a clearer understanding of how staging information is captured and transferred in local systems. Dr Collins explained that the team had previously assumed that entering staging data into the trust’s prescribing system (Aria) would feed through to the National Disease Registration Service (NDRS) therefore be reflected in the Audit. The quality improvement work highlighted that staging data needed to be recorded in Infoflex for submission. The team also identified that the MDT coordinator had the most direct access to enter this information into the system.
The team also highlighted a practical challenge: haematological malignancies are complex, and even when staging is mentioned during MDT meetings it is not always easy for the MDT coordinator to record the staging information reliably.
What changed
The Oxford team introduced two process changes to support more consistent recording of staging and related information in Infoflex.
- Brief review at the end of the MDT meeting for new lymphoma diagnoses
To improve the routine capture of key staging information, Dr Collins introduced a brief meeting at the end of each MDT meeting for new lymphoma diagnoses. As the MDT chair, he now meets with the MDT coordinator to confirm the stage and other relevant information, which are then recorded directly in Infoflex at the time of discussion.
Dr Collins noted that the approach may not capture every patient – for example, when some cases are not brought to the MDT meeting – but emphasised that the change improves the consistency and accuracy of information recorded for those who are discussed.
2. A change to ensure new chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) patients are logged via the MDT route
The Oxford team found that essentially no staging data was recorded for CLL patients, largely because most CLL patients do not need to be discussed at the MDT meeting as their management is protocolised.
To address this, the CLL specialist nurse now refers every new CLL patient to the MDT meetings. These patients are listed at the end of the agenda as not for discussion, but the referral ensures the work is logged and staging information is recorded. This simple change has helped make the process more consistent while requiring minimal additional MDT time.
Early signs of impact
Dr Collins noted that it will take time to see whether these changes translate into more complete data returns. The trust will be able to assess progress as submissions reflect the new approach.
Practical lessons other trusts may find helpful
Based on Oxford’s experience, practical steps that may support data quality improvements include:
- Confirm which local system needs to hold staging information for NDRS/audit submissions. Trusts are encouraged to contact their local Data Improvement Lead at NDRS if necessary.
- Integrate a short, repeatable step into the MDT routine to confirm and record key information directly in the system used for data submissions.
- Review pathways for patient groups that are not routinely discussed at MDT meetings, ensuring there is a reliable process for capturing essential information consistently.
We will continue to build a small library of case studies and will publish additional case studies in due course; providing further examples to support trusts in their ongoing quality improvement work.
