Headline finding
Baseline · Demo Data
Across 21 audit criteria, mean compliance is 72%. NEWS2 scores are widely documented, but the most consistent gaps sit downstream of the trigger — particularly clinical review within target time, repeat observations and structured escalation documentation.
Areas of good practice
Criteria meeting or approaching target
Key gaps identified
Widest distance from local target
- Reason for delay documented where relevant — 47% (target 80%)
- Clinical review within local target time — 58% (target 90%)
- Repeat observations within local target — 61% (target 90%)
- Time of escalation documented — 63% (target 90%)
- Ceiling of care reviewed where relevant — 55% (target 80%)
- Sepsis considered where relevant — 66% (target 90%)
Interpretation
Cautious summary based on baseline sample
- Recognition of NEWS2 triggers is broadly reliable, but action after the trigger is variable.
- Clinical review within local target time is the single largest driver of low overall compliance.
- Documentation of the reason for delay is uncommon, limiting learning from missed escalations.
- SDEC and general medical wards show more variation than AMU — worth exploring at ward level.
- Ceiling-of-care review remains inconsistent and warrants explicit inclusion in the deteriorating patient bundle.
Sample size is limited; conclusions should be treated as provisional until a fuller cycle is completed.
Safety and governance implications
For local review
- Delayed clinical review after a high NEWS2 score is a recognised patient safety risk.
- Any deterioration-related safety concern identified during audit must be escalated locally.
- Findings should be shared with ward governance, mortality and morbidity, and outreach forums.
- Local NEWS2 policy compliance should be reviewed against Martha's Rule expectations where applicable.