Women’s health
study to illustrate how gaps in data, pathway adherence and governance contribute to inequitable care and poor patient experience. FOI responses gathered by the MTG reveal that many ICBs do not have specific guidance or care pathways to primary care providers on when to refer patients with endometriosis (32% have no guidance and 24% are currently developing pathways). Most ICBs do not hold basic operational data on gynaecology, including the care pathways, diagnostic activity, or outcomes, and few have mechanisms for monitoring adherence to relevant NICE guidance. In many systems, women’s health is subsumed within general elective recovery programmes rather than treated as a defined priority with dedicated oversight. This leaves little visibility of performance, variation, or patient experience, making it difficult for ICBs or national bodies to drive improvement or hold systems to account. Better practice does exist across the
system with Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, and Coventry and Warwickshire ICBs displaying defined endometriosis referral pathways, and Nottingham and Nottinghamshire monitoring adherence to care pathways by primary care providers. Greater Manchester has led professional training initiatives, and Lincolnshire collects audit data on endometriosis outcomes, examples that show how accountability and focus can drive improvement. However, nationally, women’s health remains under- prioritised. The Women’s Health Strategy identifies menstrual health and gynaecological conditions as priority areas, with ambitions to reduce diagnostic times for endometriosis, improve women’s experiences of care, and ensure consistent implementation of NICE guidance.
With more than 750,000 people waiting for hospital gynaecology service, delays in diagnosis and treatment remain widespread. To deliver equitable care, MTG says that NICE guidance must be implemented consistently, data collected routinely, and outcomes measured transparently across every ICB. The MTG warns that this lack of data and
governance is directly contributing to a ‘postcode lottery’ in women’s health and across other clinical areas, where access to timely diagnosis and effective treatment depends more on geography than clinical need. Therefore, the MTG is calling for the
introduction of a National Best Practice Framework to standardise data collection, governance, and learning across all ICBs. It is also calling for systematic sharing of best practice across the NHS. Barbara Harpham, Chair of the Medical
Technology Group, said: “Our findings show that, in many parts of the NHS, system leaders simply do not have the data, governance or oversight needed to understand how key services are performing or how to improve them. This is particularly evident in gynaecology, where women’s health is suffering because of major gaps in data collection and strategic planning across ICBs. Robust data and governance are essential to support the adoption and spread
of best practice, making it easier for women to access and choose less invasive medical technologies that can reduce time to treatment and ensure safer outcomes. “At present, too much accountability sits solely with providers, while NHS leaders and commissioners lack the information and levers they need to monitor performance and drive the adoption of best practice.”
SCAN ME
CSJ
View the full report:
A System that Learns: Embedding Best Practice Across the NHS.
About the Medical Technology Group
The Medical Technology Group (MTG) is a coalition of patient groups, research charities and medical device manufacturers working to make medical technologies available to everyone who needs them. Uptake of medical technology in the UK is not as good as it should
be, given its great potential to provide value for money to the NHS, patients and taxpayers. The MTG believes that patients and clinicians need better information about medical technologies so that they can make informed choices about their medical care.
June 2026 I
www.clinicalservicesjournal.com 25
Krakenimages.com -
stock.adobe.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
