Accreditation Of Pelvic Floor Units

  • Home
  • Accreditation Of Pelvic Floor Units

QA & Governance

Welcome to the QA & Governance section which addresses the accreditation of Pelvic Floor units, standards of practice and peer review.  It also contains guidelines and commissioning doccumentation pertinent to the Pelvic Floor.

Chair: Mark Mercer-Jones, Gateshead  

 Contact me

Accreditation of Units

Definition of Pelvic Floor Unit

Definition and accreditation of a pelvic floor multidisciplinary team

KPIs for unit accreditation

Tertiary referral centres for dealing with mesh complications


Accreditation of Units

The Pelvic Floor Society has an obligation to ensure high quality care is provided to patients with pelvic floor disorders. As such the society has strived to identify the components that make up the optimal pelvic floor service in terms of resource and process. These criteria have been assembled and their importance stratified by consensus to identify a benchmark of quality care which can be formally assessed to as part of an accreditation process .

We wish to invite all units to submit data to this accreditation process. A peer review carried out by at least 4 peers who are ordinary members of The Society will allow feedback as to whether these standards are met or where components of unit performance may be improved. It is hoped that, if carried out correctly, such a process will benefit its members in terms of recognition if standards are met and providing leverage for more resource if standards are not met. More importantly the patient will benefit from confidence that quality assurance is guaranteed as far as possible.

The proposed criteria (KPIs) and their weighting are detailed below. Some are regarded as mandatory (i.e. they require a score of greater than zero). A total score of greater than 75 indicates achievement of the necessary standards. 

The process is not meant to be dictatorial, merely to provide peer review. It is proposed that those that meet current standards will be registered as ‘accredited by The Pelvic Floor Societyfor a period of 4 years. Those that do not meet all the criteria will be directed to areas that may be improved and invited to resubmit at any time. Wherever possible, support will be provided with the aim that all units that apply will eventually meet these criteria and be accredited. 

A number of units have now been formally accredited.  We are in a position to accredit further units and encourage all of those units who wish to undergo the process to contact  Mark Mercer Jones and provide the information detailed below. 

If you would like to be an assessor for this process could you send your details to Mark Mercer-Jones. If you have feedback regarding this process please also feel free to contact us. 


2014 ACPGBI PF census report



Definition of Pelvic Floor Unit

  • Dedicated PF Clinic or equivalent per week including secondary and tertiary referrals as part of a multidisciplinary service.
  • Evidence of training in an accredited unit, which provides the full range of investigations  and treatments required for training.
  • Regular anorectal physiology & urodynamic sessions either personally or in a supervisory capacity.
  • Provide three clinical sessions in PF per week.
  • A regular & programmed PF MDT meeting a minimum of once/month
  • One major procedure associated with pelvic floor dysfunction i.e. incontinence and prolapse per working week per year.
  • Full clinical Audit e.g. TPFS or BSUG surgical audit
  • Appropriate CME review in PF


Definition & accreditation of a pelvic floor multidisciplinary team

In the early 1990s it was recognised that treatment of cancer required a dedicated and formal MDT if cancer treatment was to be delivered by specialists rather than generalists with the additional aims of: avoiding missing factors relevant to the decision making process about treatment, allow a robust audit processes to be developed as well as improving communication with patients.  There is a widespread perception that MDT working has brought benefits to patients and that the decision making process has been improved.  Pelvic floor management is in many ways more complex that cancer management.

  • The pelvic floor consists of multiple compartments traditionally managed by completely different specialties who may have different views about therapy. And yet pathology of the pelvic floor often affects multiple pelvic compartments.
  • The complex nature of disease often requires multiple specialists involved in investigation and treatment. And yet many staff work in isolation with surgeons, physicians, radiologists, specialist nurses and physiologists having little direct discussion.
  • The evidence base for therapy is poor. There is a desperate need for robust research and audit, which is not possible unless there is a method streaming patients and collating data.
  • With such a complex management pathway there is a paramount need for uniform and clear communication with the patient as well as primary, secondary and even tertiary care.

The argument for a pelvic floor MDT appears strong. It would bring together staff with the necessary knowledge, skills and experience to ensure high quality diagnosis treatment and care. However, other than following the blueprint of cancer MDTs there is very little data to guide the definition and constitution of such an MDT and how to assure such teams will deliver consistent high quality care.  Recognising this need The Pelvic Floor Society has prioritised the development of this guidance.


  • To categorise the characteristics of a pelvic floor MDT
  • To document its role
  • To detail the process of accreditation

Sources of information:

There is no direct guidance about the definition, role or accreditation of a pelvic floor MDT.

Indirect guidance is taken from:

  1. The National Cancer Action Team 
    Characteristics of an effective multidisciplinary team are detailed in a document produced by the Department of Health. This gives details of what constitutes and effective MDT for cancer treatment. Many aspects of design can be extrapolated to the pelvic floor scenario.
  2.  NICE guidance CG49
    NICE guidance exists for the treatment of faecal incontinence. This document recommends that ‘people who report or are reported to have faecal incontinence should be offered care to be managed by healthcare professionals who have the relevant skills,training and experience and who work within an integrated continence service’. The document suggests who should be involved in care. 
  3. British Society of Urogynaecology. Standards for Service Provision.
    This document proposes methods for accreditation of services in a specialty closely associated with colorectal pelvic floor.
  4.  Expert opinion
    Healthcare professionals recognised amongst their peers to have the relevant skills, training and experience to manage patients with pelvic floor conditions were questioned as to their views and opinions.

The focus of an MDT:

An effective pelvic floor MDT should result in:

  • Individualised treatment and care assessed by professional healthcare workers with specialist knowledge and skills relevant to the pelvic floor
  • Patients being offered the opportunity to be involved in clinical trials, regardless of age.
  • Patients being given comprehensive information and tailored support needed to cope with a pelvic floor condition
  • Continuity of care even when this care involves different healthcare professionals
  • Good communication between primary, secondary and tertiary care
  • Good data collection, both for the benefit of the patient and for robust high quality audit and research.
  • Improved outcomes as a result of better understanding of the patient’s issues primarily and also their condition
  • Adherence to local and national guidelines
  • Promotion of effective working relationships
  • Opportunities for education and training
  • Optimisation of resources by more efficient working and standardisation of outcome measures.

Categorisation of MDT characteristics:

The Team: Members will be considered as core or essential to the running of a pelvic floor service. These core members will include at least one colorectal surgeon who specialises in performing the spectrum of operations that may be needed to treat the conditions.  A pelvic floor physiologist and/or a specialist nurse who undertake diagnostic evaluation of pelvic floor abnormalities and introduce and optimize conservative management at an early stage and a urogynaecologist.  It will also iclude a  radiologist with an interest in pelvic floor disorders who is able to offer a high quality dynamic defaecography service and interpretation of endoanal ultrasound as well a a member of administrative staff to ensure documentation is accurate and effectively recorded.

Members that can be considered as valuable contributors but not essential (extended members) include:

- A medical gastroenterologists with an interest in dysmotility
- A pain management specialist interested in chronic pelvic pain
- A psychologist and psychiatrist
- A functional urologist
- Alternative therapist specializing in acupuncture/homeopathy.


  • MDT members (core and extended) should have dedicated time in their job plan to prepare for and attend MDT meetings. The frequency and amount of time dedicated to such meetings should be negotiated locally to reflect the local workload, but should be no less that monthly.
  • Core members should be present for discussion of all cases where their input is required- it is for the chair to decide (in consultation with others) whether there is adequate representation at a single meeting to make safe recommendations about any/all patients
  • The chair is responsible for raising concerns about non-attendance and escalating these concerns if necessary. Frequent non-attendance should be addressed in the appraisal and job-planning review.
  • Extended members and non -members attend for the cases that are relevant to them.
  • There should be a register maintained of those attending and minutes recorded.


Chair: There should be a chair who is responsible for the organisation and smooth running of the MDT meetings.  The responsibilities of the chair include:

  • Preparing an agenda
  • Ensuring meeting is quorate taking action if not
  • Ensuring all relevant cases are discussed
  • Ensuring all relevant team members are included
  • Ensuring discussions are focused and relevant
  • Ensures good communication
  • Promotes evidence-based and patient centred recommendations and ensures that eligibility for relevant trial recruitment is considered
  • Ensures all discussion points and treatment plans are complete before the next patient discussion starts
  • Ensures all data is recorded and the recommendations summarized and fed back to the patient. GP and clinical team and patient within a locally agreed time frame
  • Ensures it is clear who is going to action any interventions and that this is recorded.

Team working and culture:  

It is essential that each MDT member has mutual respect and trust of each other and has an equal voice with different opinions valued. Best practice should be shared with an opportunity for learning from each other.


  • There should be a dedicated room with a layout to allow all members to sit and hear each other and view all presented data.
  • There should be equipment for projecting and viewing radiological images
  • There should be access to radiological investigations and other investigation results


Ideally, each meeting should be combined with a small presentation or journal review on a topical issue, which may involve any aspect of colorectal, urological or gynaecological pelvic floor topic. In particular for specialist centres, this will allow for research performed locally to be effectively disseminated amongst collaborative groups.

Meeting organization and logistics:

  •  MDT meetings should take place regularly as case volume dictates and at times so as not to clash with related clinical commitments such as pelvic floor clinics.
  • Cases for discussion should be identified by each core member and included for submission to the chair.
  • There is a locally agreed cut off time for inclusion of a case on the MDT. Flexibility for urgent cases should be allowed.
  • The patient list is circulated to all members prior to the meeting, which includes a locally agreed minimal dataset.
  • Each case is discussed by the member relevant to the case
  • There is access to all relevant information at the meeting including patient notes, test results, images and appointment dates.


Ensuring processes are in place for communicating MDT recommendations to patients, GPs and clinical teams within locally agreed time frames. Ensuring the agreed actions are implemented or the MDT is notified of significant changes made to their recommendations.

Who to discuss?

  • There should be local mechanisms in place to identify all patients where discussion at MDT is needed
  • There should be local criteria in place so it is clear when to send a case to the MDT for consideration ie clarity on:which patients should be discussed & the clinical question?

Patient centred care

  • Patients should be aware of the MDT purpose and structure
  • There views should be represented by someone who has met the patient whenever possible. However, referrals to a designated lead within specialties is encouraged.

Clinical decision making process

  • A locally agreed minimum dataset of information is provided at the meeting, including nationally recognised scoring systems where possible
  • All clinically appropriate treatment options should be considered even if they cannot be offered locally.
  • There should be access to a list of all current and relevant clinical trials and suitability should be considered for each patient.
  • Standard treatment protocols should be in place and used when appropriate.
  • Patient views, preferences and needs inform the decision making process
  • MDT recommendations should always be:
    • Evidence-based & patient- centred
    • In line with standard treatment protocols. Deviations should have good reason and the reason documented
  • If data is missing or incomplete it should be possible to bring the patient back for further discussion when the data becomes available.
  • It should be clear who will communicate the MDT recommendation to the patient, GP and clinical team. This should be documented and filed in the patient’s notes (the responisibility of the admin staff). 


Organisational support: 

There are costs associated with running an MDT. There is therefore the need for organisational (employer support) for MDT meetings demonstrated via recognition that MDTs are the accepted model to deliver safe and high quality care.  There is a need to fund the resources/ time/ equipment and facilities for MDT meetings to operate effectively 

Data collection, analysis and audit:

  • Data collection resource should be available to the MDT
  • Key information that directly affects treatment decisions should be collected
  • National datasets should be developed and populated allowing refinement of treatment
  • Data collected is analysed and fed back to the MDT for the purpose of learning
  • There should be internal and external audits of process and outcome. This should include an annual general meeting for discussion of outcomes and an accreditation process for pelvic floor processes of units.

Clinical governance
The purpose of the MDT and its expected outputs are clearly defined locally. There should be agreed guidelines as to

  • How the MDT operates
  • Who the core and extended members are
  • The roles of the members
  • How the members should work together
  • How changes to clinical practice should be managed
  • Communications post meeting
  • Regular audits of standardised outcomes reporting to the core MDT group as evidenced by minutes at governance meetings.

There should be mechanisms in place to 

  • Record recommendations of the MDT versus the actual treatment given and reasons if there is variation
  • Record serious or adverse events
  • Monitor the proportion of patients discussed
  • Monitoring of outcomes

Accreditation of units

The process whereby units will be accredited as nationally recognised pelvic floor units has yet to be developed. It will have to include definitions of what constitutes a colorectal pelvic floor specialist and what resources are available to them. However, it is clear that one important aspect of such a centre is whether an MDT exists and whether it meets the categories outlined in this document.

KPIs for Unit accreditation

Criteria updated July 2021. New areas highlighted in red. 



Minimal Standard

Aspirational Standard


Comments for markers


Information giving


























Information gathering

Patient information sheets for all major procedures



-Sphincter repair


-Posterior repair

as well as conservative management eg







Unit protocol algorithm for

1.     Constipation management

2.     Incontinence management

3.     Pelvic pain management



History and examination proforma




Quality of life assessment for all patients undergoing intervention

Website based information






























Evidence of follow up QoL assessment

































4 marks for core

1 for aspirational















2 for constipation

2 for incontinence

1 for pain








4 marks for assessment of all new

1 for follow up




(SEE website for guidance)

































Regional/multi Trust MDM

Colorectal Surgeon (>1)



Clinical Scientist and/or nurse specialist





Some membership of TPFS






Discussion of ALL

  - Patients considering surgery, including SNS (and other continence procedures), rectal prolapse (IRP&ERP), defunctioning stomas, colectomy, STARR.


Evidence of conversion rate to surgery [from annual nos of new patients seen in OPD for     1) Constipation/ODS

2) Continence]


Register of attendees




2 or more Trust MDM’s





Pain specialist

Research fellow/nurses



All enrolled in TPFS


More frequently




















annual AGM (review of process)








































8 marks for core

2 for others








2 marks for 1 member. 5 for all


4 for monthly

1 for more frequently


Fail if not provided









Fail if not provided







4 for evidence of register

1 mark for AGM


8 for multi-trust

2 for regional

















Other consultants  with interest








Allied health professional support (eg, continence nurse, GI physiologist, physiotherapist)

-CV to include training, CPD etc

-Job plan to include at least 1 PA per week

- Evidence of an average of at least 1 major pelvic floor op per week (SNS, rectopexy, sphincter repair, etc)

- Evidence of referrals from colleagues





-CV to include training, CPD etc

-Job plan

- Evidence of pelvic floor work

- Evidence of referrals from general colleagues



Summary of numbers

-National or international involvement in pelvic floor topics

(leadership, quality improvement etc)









National or international involvement in pelvic floor issues

(leadership, quality improvement etc)



Details of CPD



























4  marks for >1PA

2 mark for op evidence

1 mark for CPD

1 mark for national involvement

2 marks for training









2 marks for >1PA

1 mark for op evidence

1 mark for CPD

1 mark for national





1 mark for evidence CPD

4 marks for evidence of AHP attendance



































PF Training

Unit throughput data







Auditable Outcomes



















Engagement in R&D





Evidence of training core trainees/AHCP’s

12 month data kept for:

  - New OPD referrals

  - Biofeedback

  - Surgical activity





Morbidity recording and monitoring for 12 months, including reporting any mesh related complications to MHRA






Evidence of use of TPFS audit database for LVMR (if done)



Recurrence data for external rectal prolapse (12 month period)


Local audit






For surgical trainees, logbook evidence.

AHCP’s annual appraisal evidence of training


- Physiology   investigation

- Physiotherapy





Patient reported outcome measures

  - Severity scores

  - QofL scores












Recurrence data for >12 months



Recruitment to national portfolio study




PF fellow




































1 mark for each of these







10 marks for M&M

 5 for aspirational (PROM’s)

Fail if mesh related complications not reported






Fail if no evidence (if LVMR done)








Up to 3 for local audit, full 5 if national recruitment



10 for minimum standard, 5 for PF fellow



Total mark achievable 150 (previously 90)


Pass mark is still 65%


Notes to accompany the new PF accreditation submission document for submitting units and markers


Changes and new KPI’s are indicated in red in the new submission document.


Patient selection:


Proof that ALL patients having surgery are recorded at the MDM (12 months data).  The relevant elective surgery lists for all consultant surgeons for that period are to be provided and cross referenced with the corresponding MDM minutes.


For calculation of the conversion rate to surgery following failed conservative management, the numbers of new OPD referrals for constipation/ODS and faecal incontinence are to be provided for the index 12 months.  The elective surgery numbers for these conditions will be available on the submitted elective surgery lists.  It is the responsibility of the submitting unit to calculate and provide this evidence.


Auditable outcomes:


Morbidity and mortality reporting, depends upon the trust and integrity of the unit and it is expected that these are reported in the MDM minutes.  Any mesh/implant related complications should be visible in the MDM minutes and cross-referenced with evidence (or not) of reporting to the MHRA


Notes for units that are applying for re-accreditation


Renewal is required every 4 years.  Six months prior to the date for renewal the PFS Accreditation Chair will contact the unit to remind them.  Any unit that does not comply with the timely submission of data required will be removed from the published list of accredited units (unless there are extenuating circumstances).


Data required:


  •        New requirements as per the newly published KPI’s for accreditation
  •        Any change in MDT representatives, job plans etc
  •        Any change in personnel
  •        Unit throughput data, including 12 months auditable outcomes,  conversion rates, M&M, use of TPFS database, recurrence data for ERP
  •        R&D
  •        PF training



Slot Vip Online Bintang189
Slot Vip Bintang189 Online
Slot Online Bintang189
Slot Maxwin Bintang189
Slot Luar Negeri Bintang189
Slot Gacor Server Bintang189
Slot Gacor Bintang189
Situs Slot Gacor Maxwin Resmi
Situs Slot Gacor Bintang189
Situs Bintang189
Server Judi Slot Bintang189
Login Bintang189
link situs Bintang189
Link Bintang189
link alternatif situs Bintang189
Link Alternatif Bintang189
Daftar Situs Slot Bintang189
Daftar Situs Bintang189
Daftar Bintang189
Bintang189 Vip Online
Bintang189 Vip
Bintang189 Terpercaya
Bintang189 Slot Gacor
Bintang189 Slot
Bintang189 Resmi
Bintang189 Online
Bintang189 Maxwin
Bintang189 Gampang Menang
Slot Online Inves4d
Slot Maxwin Inves4d
Slot Gacor Inves4d
Situs Slot Gacor Inves4d
Situs Inves4d
Login Inves4d
Link Inves4d
Link Alternatif Inves4d
Inves4d Terpercaya
Inves4d Slot Gacor
Inves4d Slot
Inves4d Resmi
Inves4d Maxwin
Daftar Situs Slot Inves4d
Daftar Situs Inves4d
Daftar Inves4d
Daftar Situs Slot Superstarqq88
Daftar Situs Superstarqq88
Daftar Superstarqq88
Link Alternatif Superstarqq88
Link Superstarqq88
Login Superstarqq88
Situs Slot Gacor Superstarqq88
Situs Superstarqq88
Slot Gacor Superstarqq88
Superstarqq88 Slot
Superstarqq88 Slot Gacor
Daftar S0999
Daftar Situs S0999
Daftar Situs Slot S0999
Link Alternatif S0999
Link S0999
Login S0999
S0999 Maxwin
S0999 Slot
S0999 Slot Gacor
Situs S0999
Situs Slot Gacor S0999
Slot Gacor S0999
Slot Maxwin S0999
Superstarqq88 Gampang Menang
Slot Online S0999
Situs Slot Gacor S9989
Situs Slot Gacor s1688
Situs Slot Gacor Maxwin Resmi
S9989 Slot Gacor
S9989 Slot
s1688 Terpercaya
s1688 Slot Gacor
s1688 Slot
s1688 Resmi
Login S9989
Login s1688
Link S9989
Link s1688
Link Alternatif S9989
Link Alternatif s1688
Daftar Situs Slot S9989
Daftar Situs Slot s1688
Daftar Situs S9989
Daftar Situs s1688
Bandar Totobet hk Hari Ini
Pasaran Togel Online
Slot Hoki Hari Ini
Togel Hongkong 2023 Termurah
Toto 4D Hari Ini Gampang Menang
Situs Macau Togel
live toto macau hari ini
Hasil Keluaran Toto Terlengkap
Situs Slot Hoki
Para Togelers HK 2023
Result Toto Tercepat
Togel 4D Online Terpercaya
Toto Macau Hari Ini
Slot online Hari Ini Gampang Menang
Daftar Agen Togel Terpercaya
Situs Prediksi HK Tercepat
Situs Togel Terpercaya
Situs Judi Slоt Onlіnе
Situs Live Draw Togel
Situs Keluaran Toto Tercepat
Toto Hari Ini Gampang Menang
Situs Bandar Terpercaya
Pasaran togel
Togel Macau Online Hari Ini
Agen Togel Resmi
Situs Gacor Judi Slot Online
situs slot online gacor
Situs Slot S0999 Online
slot online dana
Situs Slot Gacor Samatogel
Situs Samatogel
Samatogel Slot Gacor
Samatogel Slot
Login Samatogel
Link Samatogel
Link Alternatif Samatogel
Daftar Situs Slot Samatogel
Daftar Situs Samatogel
Daftar Samatogel
Bocoran RTP Slot Hari Ini Samatogel
Info Bocoran RTP Samatogel
Info Bocoran RTP Live Samatogel
RTP Live Slot Online Inves4D
rtp slot Inves4D
rtp slot pragmatic Inves4D
RTP SLOT LIVE Bintang189
RTP Slot Hari Ini Bintang189
RTP Slot Itbslot88
RTP Slot Itbslot88
Info Bocoran RTP Live Slot Online Itbslot88
Bocoran RTP Slot S0999
Situs Togel Online
Slot Maxwin Itbslo88
Login Itbslo88
Itbslo88 Slot Gacor
Itbslo88 Slot
Daftar Situs Slot Itbslo88
Itbslo88 Maxwin
Link Alternatif Itbslo88
Link Itbslo88
depo 10 bonus 15
bonus new member 100 to 5x
new member 100
live rtp slot pragmatic
live slot pragmatic
kemenanganku slot
Bonus new member 100
rtp slot live
rtp slot live terlengkap
slot deposit dana bonus 100
deposit dana bonus new member
slot gacor 2023
Slot Gacor
slot gacor gampang menang
Slot Online
Slot Gacor Terbaru
Slot Gacor Terbaru
Slot Gacor Terbaik
slot Gacor hari ini
Situs Slot Online
Situs Slot Gacor