Elsevier

Health Policy

Volume 51, Issue 3, April 2000, Pages 181-190
Health Policy

The hidden cost of clinical audit: a questionnaire study of NHS staff

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-8510(00)00064-6Get rights and content

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the full cost of clinical audit in one health board area and extrapolate the result to Scotland. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to a representative sample of NHS staff to determine time spent on clinical audit. This was combined with cost data from clinical audit budgets and unit cost data for staff time. Results: Seventy-two percent of staff participated in clinical audit at some point in time. Medical staff were significantly more likely to participate in audit that non medical staff (P<0.0001). Those who participated in clinical audit devoted only a small proportion of time to it. However, due to the high participation rates in clinical audit, this aggregated to a significant amount. In Forth Valley the total cost was estimated to be £1.72m (£1.37m–£2.10m) and in Scotland £36.3m (£29.6m–£44.0m). Staff time accounted for over 80% of the total cost of clinical audit. Conclusions: Clinical audit is widespread within the Scottish NHS and the total cost of staff time devoted to audit is substantial. Research is needed into the value of clinical audit and the potential cost implications of clinical governance need to be explicitly recognised.

Introduction

Since 1989, when the white paper Working for Patients promoted clinical audit as a mechanism for improving the quality of medical practice [1], audit activity has widened from its medical base to include other health care professionals and its practice has become widespread within the NHS. More recently clinical audit has been subsumed within the clinical governance agenda and has become only one component of a larger quality movement. However, it is still viewed as one of the main vehicles for the implementation of clinical governance [2], [3].

Despite its prevalence within the NHS, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the effectiveness and cost of clinical audit [4]. The evaluation of the effectiveness of clinical audit is inherently difficult, given the problems with defining satisfactory outcome measures and with setting up controlled trials, which have been discussed elsewhere [5]. Meanwhile, little attention has been paid to the total cost of clinical audit in the NHS. Previous studies of the cost of clinical audit have been limited, ranging from attempts to identify hospital expenditure on clinical audit [6], [7] to costing staff time attending clinical audit meetings [8], [9]. No study has provided a robust and complete estimate of the cost of clinical audit within a defined area.

In this study we estimated the total costs associated with clinical audit in one health board area and extrapolated this cost estimate to Scotland. This was calculated by estimating both the financial resources allocated to clinical audit and the time spent by NHS staff on clinical audit. We surveyed a representative sample of NHS staff to estimate the time and cost of clinical audit activity.

Section snippets

Cost identification

Clinical audit was conceptualised as consisting of two types of cost: overt and hidden costs. Overt costs were defined as those costs identified in published accounts as dedicated to clinical audit, the principal constituents being local audit staff and consumables (stationery, equipment, software, travel, etc). Hidden audit costs were defined as the time and consumables used by NHS staff taking part in audit.

Only costs with a direct impact on the NHS in Forth Valley health board in the

Results

The overall response rate was 990/1296 (76%). This was achieved after two written reminders. Non respondents were similar to respondents in terms of age (P=0.11) and sex (P=0.63). The response rate varied significantly by stratum (P=0.001). Other medical staff had the lowest response rate at 57% whilst all other groups had a response rate of at least 70%.

Discussion

This study provides an insight into the scale of participation and costs associated with clinical audit in Scotland. It is clear that the practice of audit is widespread and has become almost routine for many in the NHS. Now that the agenda has shifted emphasis towards clinical governance it is important not to lose sight of the significant costs associated with delivering this agenda, not only in terms of structures and processes but also staff time. Our study has illustrated that staff time

Acknowledgements

We thank the staff in Forth Valley for completing the questionnaire and the staff from personnel, finance and audit departments for information provided. We would also like to thank Kirsten Major, John Forbes and two anonymous referees for comments on earlier drafts. The research was commissioned by the Chief Scientist Office, Edinburgh.

References (13)

  • Secretaries of State for Health, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Working for Patients. London: HMSO...
  • The Scottish Office. Department of Health. Clinical Governance NHS MEL 1998:...
  • Department of Health. A First Class Service: Quality in the new NHS. London: HMSO...
  • Committee of Public Accounts. Auditing Clinical Care in Scotland (HC 375). London: HMSO...
  • J. Lord et al.

    Evaluating healthcare policies: the case of clinical audit

    British Medical Journal

    (1997)
  • D. Tomalin et al.

    Count the cost

    Health Service Journal

    (1999)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (12)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text