Overview
Free projects are complete and ready to use. Paid projects can also be adapted to your local requirements. This project uses a fixed Lazomis clinical configuration of 27 audit criteria across cohort and assessment context, initial pain assessment, individualised assessment, intervention or action, reassessment after intervention, safety, adverse effects and monitoring, and escalation and follow-up. Data collection, dashboards, findings, improvement planning, re-audit and every output are included at no cost.
Specialties, services & categories
Who should use it
- Doctors, nurses, clinical pharmacists, ACPs and physician associates
- Pain nurses, palliative care clinicians, ward leaders and ED/UTC leads
- QI, clinical governance and service management teams
- Trainees needing ARCP-ready evidence
Objectives
- Measure whether an initial pain assessment is documented using an appropriate method
- Review whether pain severity, site, character and functional impact are documented
- Review whether action is taken where pain is present and whether pain is reassessed afterwards
- Review safety consideration, monitoring, escalation, follow-up and discharge pain plans
- Generate governance-ready and ARCP-ready evidence
Data collected
- Anonymised case number, review date, audit cycle, care setting and location
- Age band, communication or cognition issue, postoperative and palliative status
- Pain assessment method, severity category and adapted-assessment need
- Intervention type, reassessment timing, pain response, escalation route
- 27 fixed audit criteria (Yes / No / Not applicable)
- Free-text learning points
Outputs generated
- Live dashboard
- Audit report (Word)
- Executive summary (Word)
- Excel workbook
- PowerPoint presentation
- Conference poster
- ARCP evidence summary
Governance notes
- Designed to use anonymised or pseudonymised audit identifiers.
- This tool supports, but does not replace, clinical judgement.
- Local policy, formulary and specialist advice should be followed.
- Organisations remain responsible for local governance arrangements.
- This tool supports clinical audit and quality improvement. It does not replace clinical judgement, local policy, local formulary, specialist advice or urgent escalation pathways.
- Severe, rapidly worsening, unexplained, postoperative, traumatic, neurological, chest, abdominal, sickle cell, cancer-related, palliative or safeguarding-related pain should be managed according to local urgent or emergency escalation pathways.
- No universal pain-score threshold or reassessment interval is imposed. Local acute pain, opioid safety, postoperative, palliative care, paediatric, safeguarding and escalation policies apply.
- Use anonymous case identifiers only — never patient-identifiable information.
Lazomis QI supporting resources
Supporting guidance from the Lazomis QI Resource Library. Authoritative clinical standards referenced by this project remain separate.
- Clinical GovernanceIntegrating Quality Improvement into Clinical Governance FrameworksThis article explores the vital relationship between Quality Improvement (QI) and Clinical Governance within the NHS, demonstrating how they are two sides of the same coin when aiming for continuous, systematic improvement in patient care.
- Patient SafetyEscalation Failures: Understanding and Preventing Harm in Clinical PracticeEscalation failures are a significant contributor to avoidable harm in healthcare. This guide explores their root causes and outlines practical steps for NHS staff to improve communication, clinical handover, and timely senior review.
- Clinical GovernanceEffective Clinical Governance Meetings: Driving Improvement, Not Just ReportingThis guide helps NHS teams redefine their clinical governance meetings, moving beyond mere reporting to foster proactive discussion, shared learning, and tangible improvement actions for patient safety and quality of care.
- Quality ImprovementHow Many PDSA Cycles Does a Quality Improvement Project Need?This guide explains the iterative nature of PDSA cycles and offers practical advice for determining the appropriate number of cycles needed for effective quality improvement in NHS settings.