An audit is only as good as the data behind it. Build a structured audit form with range checks and mandatory fields, collect across wards or sites, keep a trail of every change and export for the re-audit, without a spreadsheet passed round by email.
Free sandbox · No credit card · 21 CFR Part 11 aligned
Standard: surgery within 36 hours of admission
Date and time of admission
Date and time of surgery
Auto-query: surgery is before admission
Delay reason
Standard met
At a glance
The problem
Most audits begin in a spreadsheet and most of the early time goes on cleaning it. Free-text dates arrive in three formats, one ward leaves a column blank, a second copy circulates by email and nobody can say which version was analysed. The standard might be clear, such as surgery within 36 hours of admission, but the data does not reliably show whether it was met.
The cost of this shows up at the audit meeting, when the team debates the numbers instead of the practice, and again at re-audit, when last year's method cannot be reproduced exactly. A structured form fixes the definitions once: the same fields, the same units, the same allowed values for every case, whoever enters them.
Capture was built for clinical research, so it already has the machinery a good audit form needs. The clinical trial software for quality assurance page covers the related quality-management angle, and EDC for registry studies shows the long-running, many-record pattern that audits resemble.
Governance first
The Health Research Authority publishes a decision tool for classifying a project, and many NHS trusts point staff to it. The distinction rests mainly on purpose: research aims to derive new, generalisable knowledge; audit measures current practice against standards to inform care; service evaluation assesses what a service currently delivers. Research normally needs ethics review; audit and service evaluation normally do not. Even so, trusts expect local registration with the audit or governance team and a check on information governance, so do not treat "not research" as "no approval".
This page does not say which route your project takes, and a software tool does not change it. If the project turns out to be research, for example a prospective study designed to generalise, the same forms can serve a formal observational study, with consent where needed and the controls described on the platform page. If you are classifying a project, keep the decision tool output with your project file.
Setting it up
For each standard decide the numerator, denominator and exceptions, for example "surgery within 36 hours; exclude patients unfit for surgery with the reason recorded".
Use the form builder or let the AI Study Builder draft fields from a description or uploaded sheet. Every field is reviewed by you before anything is saved. Use dropdowns and numeric fields rather than free text.
Range and rule checks raise an auto-query when a value breaks a rule, such as surgery before admission, an age outside a plausible range or a missing mandatory field.
Give each ward or site coordinator access to their own cases and view-only access to reviewers. Role-based access and by-site filtering keep each team to its own data.
Monitor completion by site, resolve queries, then export CSV or Excel with the data dictionary for your analysis, and keep the form version for the re-audit.
What helps an audit
| Audit need | How it is met | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Consistent definitions | Structured form with typed fields and dropdowns | Ten question types plus repeating table sections |
| Catching entry errors | Edit checks raise auto-queries | Range and custom rules, with priority |
| Several wards or hospitals | Site-level numbering and by-site filtering | Separate coordinator access per site |
| Who changed what | Field-level audit trail | Timestamp, user, old and new value, reason |
| Analysis and reporting | CSV/Excel export with data dictionary | Filter by date range and site |
| Re-audit comparability | Approved forms are locked for live use | Draft, approve, then collect |
| Access control | Role-based access | Coded IDs for researchers, names only where needed |
Capture does not replace your trust's information governance. Choose what patient identifiers you collect, and keep them to the minimum the audit needs.
Create the form in the free sandbox, enter a surgery date before the admission date and watch the auto-query fire. No credit card.
Data and cost
Audits often use identifiable patient data, so involve your information governance team early and collect the minimum. Capture hosts in the EU (Frankfurt) and the USA (N. Virginia), and the security page lists the controls. You, as the organisation running the audit, remain responsible for the lawful basis and for who has access.
On cost, the pricing page is built for studies: Core is $1,000 a month with one live study, plus $50 per participant per month, and the study fee starts when the first participant is screened. For a short audit that fits a single quarter that can be modest, and the EDC per-patient pricing explained page shows how to compute it. An audit of several thousand cases is a different calculation, so talk to us before you plan it. Academic teams can also read the academia page.
You can build, test and rehearse the whole audit in the free sandbox first, with sample cases, and you pay only when you go live with real participants.
Before you start collecting
Audit, service evaluation or research, with the decision tool output on file.
Registered with the trust audit team; information governance consulted.
Numerator, denominator and exclusions written down.
Collect only what the audit needs; use coded case IDs.
Edit checks fire on bad values; reviewers tried the form.
Each ward or site sees its own cases.
Same form version, same export, agreed date.
Yes, for structured case-level collection: typed forms, edit checks, multi-site access, an audit trail and CSV/Excel export. Capture is a clinical trial platform, so decide first with your governance team that the project is audit.
Under HRA guidance audit and service evaluation normally do not need REC review, whereas research does, but local registration and information governance approval still apply. Use the HRA decision tool and check with your audit or R&D office.
Use dropdowns and numeric fields, mandatory fields and edit checks that raise an auto-query when a value breaks a rule, such as a surgery date before admission.
Yes. Capture supports site-level participant numbering, separate coordinator access and by-site filtering and exports.
Yes. CSV or Excel exports include an automatic data dictionary and can be filtered by date range and site.
That is a decision for your information governance team. Collect the minimum, use coded IDs where possible, and use the role-based access and PII segregation described on the platform pages.
The pricing page lists Core at $1,000 per month plus $50 per participant per month, with the study fee starting at the first participant screened. Larger audits need a separate calculation, so ask us. The sandbox is free.
Keep exploring
Clinical trial software for quality assurance
Quality management angle.
EDC for registry studies
Long-running case collection.
EDC for observational studies
If the project becomes research.
Audit trail software
Every change recorded.
Capture for academia
Academic and hospital teams.
Pricing
Core, Full Platform and Enterprise.
Build the audit form free, test the checks and collect across wards. You pay only once you go live.