List of patients waiting longest for hospital treatment, by deprivation area
It is the first time this data has been published.
The figures are for the week ending June 29 2025.
The data is presented in two sections, the first giving the proportions for each region, the second giving the proportions for every NHS trust.
A small number of trusts reported no data.
The regions and trusts are listed alphabetically.
The list has been compiled by the PA news agency using data published by NHS England.
The name of the region or trust is followed by the percentage of people waiting more than a year to begin treatment in the most deprived areas, then the percentage for the least deprived areas.
– Regions:
East of England: 4.9% in most deprived areas, 4.0% in least deprived areasLondon: 2.4%, 1.8%Midlands: 3.0%, 2.4%North East & Yorkshire: 2.1%, 1.9%North West: 4.0%, 3.7%South East: 3.4%, 3.1%South West: 2.1%, 1.7%
– NHS trusts:
Airedale: 0.5% in most deprived areas, no data for least deprived areasAlder Hey Children's: 2.4%, 1.8%Ashford & St Peter's Hospitals: no data, 2.1%Barking, Havering & Redbridge University Hospitals: no data, 0.5%Barnsley: 0.7%, no dataBarts: 4.1%, 3.6%Bedfordshire: 2.4%, 2.6%Birmingham Women's & Children's: 0.9%, 1.6%Blackpool Teaching Hospitals: 5.4%, 3.7%Bolton: 3.5%, 3.3%Bradford Teaching Hospitals: 0.6%, no dataBuckinghamshire: no data, 2.7%Calderdale & Huddersfield: 0.2%, no dataCambridge University Hospitals: 3.4%, 4.3%Chelsea & Westminster: 1.4%, 1.9%Chesterfield Royal: 3.5%, 3.5%Countess of Chester: 9.9%, 8.1%County Durham & Darlington: 0.9%, 1.3%Croydon Health Services: 1.2%, 2.5%Dartford & Gravesham: 3.4%, 2.9%Doncaster & Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals: 2.7%, 4.9%Dorset County: 1.4%, 1.9%East & North Hertfordshire: no data, 1.6%East Cheshire: no data, no dataEast Kent Hospitals University: 3.2%, 2.9%East Lancashire Hospitals: 4.1%, 4.0%East Suffolk & North Essex: 3.6%, 3.2%East Sussex: 1.8%, 1.6%Epsom & St Helier University Hospitals: no data, 1.6%Frimley: no data, 3.4%Gateshead: 0.4%, no dataGeorge Eliot Hospital: 3.6%, 3.9%Gloucestershire Hospitals: 0.0%, no dataGreat Ormond Street: 3.1%, 4.9%Great Western Hospitals: 2.0%, 1.6%Guy's & St Thomas': 2.3%, 2.0%Hampshire Hospitals: no data, 3.6%Harrogate & District: no data, no dataHomerton Healthcare: 0.7%, no dataHull University Teaching Hospitals: 3.8%, 3.0%Imperial College Healthcare: 2.1%, 2.4%Isle of Wight: no data, no dataJames Paget University Hospitals: 5.1%, 4.8%Kettering General Hospital: 1.3%, 0.9%King's College Hospital: 2.9%, 1.5%Kingston & Richmond: 0.0%, 0.6%Lancashire Teaching Hospitals: 4.0%, 2.6%Leeds Teaching Hospitals: 3.4%, 2.8%Lewisham & Greenwich: 4.7%, 5.1%Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital: no data, 4.3%Liverpool University Hospitals: 4.9%, 2.8%Liverpool Women's: 3.5%, no dataLondon North West University: 2.7%, 2.7%Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells: 0.0%, 0.0%Manchester University: 4.6%, 3.4%Medway: 4.2%, 5.6%Mersey & West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals: 3.1%, 2.7%Mid & South Essex: 7.8%, 6.6%Mid Cheshire Hospitals: 7.0%, 4.5%Mid Yorkshire Teaching: 0.9%, 0.6%Milton Keynes University Hospital: 5.2%, 5.1%Moorfields Eye Hospital: 0.0%, no dataNorfolk & Norwich University Hospitals: 4.8%, 4.3%North Bristol: 0.4%, 0.4%North Cumbria Integrated Care: 2.9%, 3.1%North Tees & Hartlepool: 1.2%, 0.9%North West Anglia: 3.7%, 3.6%Northampton General Hospital: 1.1%, 1.2%Northern Care Alliance: 3.9%, 4.6%Northern Lincolnshire & Goole: 2.7%, 3.5%Northumbria Healthcare: no data, 0.0%Nottingham University Hospitals: 2.1%, 1.8%Oxford University Hospitals: 3.3%. 3.4%Portsmouth Hospitals University: 4.8%, 4.1%Queen Victoria Hospital: 3.8%, 1.7%Royal Berkshire: no data, no dataRoyal Cornwall Hospitals: 1.0%, no dataRoyal Devon University Healthcare: 4.1%, 2.6%Royal Free London: 3.3%, 2.9%Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital: no data, 1.1%Royal Papworth Hospital: no data, 1.4%Royal Surrey County Hospital: no data, 5.2%Royal United Hospitals Bath: 2.5%, 2.0%Salisbury: no data, 0.7%Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals: 1.9%, 1.4%Sheffield Children's: 2.9%, 2.1%Sheffield Teaching Hospitals: 2.3%, 2.2%Sherwood Forest Hospitals: 1.6%, 1.0%Somerset: 3.0%, 2.9%South Tees Hospitals: 3.4%, 3.1%South Tyneside & Sunderland: no data, 0.0%South Warwickshire University: 7.1%, 2.2%St George's University Hospitals: 5.1%, 2.2%Stockport: 3.8%, 3.0%Surrey & Sussex Healthcare: no data, 1.7%Tameside & Glossop Integrated Care: 0.0%, 0.0%The Christie: 0.0%, 0.0%The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre: 0.0%, 0.0%The Dudley Group: 1.3%, 0.9%The Hillingdon Hospitals: 0.0%, 1.4%The Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals: 1.5%, 1.5%The Princess Alexandra Hospital: no data, 5.3%The Queen Elizabeth Hospital King's Lynn: 2.3%, no dataThe Robert Jones & Agnes Hunt Orthopaedic Hospital: 7.8%, 9.1%The Rotherham: 2.3%, no dataThe Royal Marsden: 0.0%, no dataThe Royal Orthopaedic Hospital: 3.9%, 3.6%The Royal Wolverhampton: 3.9%, 2.7%The Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital: 2.3%, 2.4%The Walton Centre: 0.8%, 1.4%Torbay & South Devon: 2.8%, 2.5%United Lincolnshire Teaching Hospitals: 2.9%, 3.0%University College London Hospitals: 2.3%, 1.9%University Hospital Southampton: 2.5%, 2.1%University Hospitals Birmingham: 5.9%, 4.8%University Hospitals Bristol & Weston: 1.4%, 1.5%University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire: 2.8%, 3.1%University Hospitals Dorset: 3.5%, 3.2%University Hospitals of Derby & Burton: 1.9%, 2.0%University Hospitals of Leicester: 2.7%, 2.0%University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay: 1.8%, 1.0%University Hospitals of North Midlands: 2.9%, 2.2%University Hospitals Plymouth: 3.8%, 3.8%University Hospitals Sussex: 6.0%, 5.1%Walsall Healthcare: 0.2%, no dataWarrington & Halton Teaching Hospitals: 5.2%, 4.7%West Hertfordshire Teaching Hospitals: no data, 1.7%West Suffolk: 8.7%, 4.4%Whittington Health: 1.3%, no dataWirral University Teaching Hospital: 3.1%, 2.3%Worcestershire Acute Hospitals: 2.1%, 1.5%Wrightington, Wigan & Leigh: 3.9%, 3.9%Wye Valley: 3.8%, 2.7%York & Scarborough Teaching Hospitals: 3.2%, 2.7%
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
2 Healthcare Stocks That Are Losing to the S&P 500 This Year
Key Points Novo Nordisk and Regeneron have encountered challenges recently. Both companies are significantly trailing the market this year. These healthcare leaders still could perform well in the long run. 10 stocks we like better than Novo Nordisk › Even with all the volatility and the flirting with bear-market territory, the S&P 500 index is well in the green this year, up about 8% since early January. Some stocks haven't been so lucky, though. Novo Nordisk (NYSE: NVO) and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: REGN), two leading drugmakers, have underperformed for most of the year, significantly lagging the broader market. These healthcare giants are facing some headwinds, but does that mean investors should steer clear of them? Let's find out. 1. Novo Nordisk Novo Nordisk has been facing several challenges that predate this year. It encountered a clinical setback for what Wall Street thought was a promising weight management candidate. Furthermore, the company's financial results, although strong when compared to its similarly sized peers, were not seen as sufficient because it's held to a higher standard. These challenges have led to a terrible performance this year. Novo Nordisk's shares are down by 18% year to date, significantly lagging the S&P 500. However, the stock might be a steal right now. The company has made several moves that should allow it to recover. Novo Nordisk's pipeline, especially in diabetes and weight management, remains one of the strongest in the industry. It recently initiated a phase 3 study for amycretin -- its next-generation GLP-1 medicine -- in both subcutaneous and oral formulations. It requested regulatory approval in the U.S. for an oral version of semaglutide, its well-known medicine marketed as Wegovy for weight loss and as Ozempic for diabetes management. Novo Nordisk has also penned several licensing deals that have expanded its pipeline in weight management. The company should launch at least one new medicine in its core therapeutic area within the next few years. Financial results should remain strong as Ozempic and Wegovy continue driving solid revenue growth. Considering the stock's sell-off over the past years, shares now look more than reasonably valued relative to Novo Nordisk's growth potential. Their forward price-to-earnings ratio of 16.9 is in line with the healthcare industry's average of 16.5 as of this writing. However, Novo Nordisk typically grows its revenue and earnings faster than its peers. That makes its stock attractive at current levels, based on its growth potential. 2. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Regeneron is facing biosimilar competition for Eylea, a medicine for wet age-related macular degeneration that was once one of its biggest growth drivers. Sales of the medicine have dropped, dragging total revenue down with them. That's the most important reason why Regeneron's shares are down by 19% since the year started. However, the stock is still attractive. The biotech might go through a period of its top line declining, but it can still recover. Here are three reasons why. First, the company's newer, higher-dose (HD) formulation of Eylea is taking market share away from its previous version. HD Eylea is performing well and will grow even faster once it earns some label expansions. Second, Regeneron has a deep pipeline that's expected to yield new brand approvals. Earlier this month, it earned the green light for Lynozyfic, a cancer medicine, in the U.S. One of its more promising candidates is a gene therapy for one type of genetic deafness, which is showing incredible potential in clinical trials. Regeneron should move beyond Eylea thanks to newer approvals. Third, the company's most important product, Dupixent, an eczema treatment, is performing exceptionally well. The medicine has earned important label expansions in recent years, including in treating chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a rare skin condition called bullous pemphigoid. Dupixent will maintain its upward growth trajectory for a while. Here's one more reason to invest in Regeneron: The company is committed to returning capital to shareholders. It recently initiated a dividend and has a robust share-buyback program in place. The stock might be moving in the wrong direction right now, but those willing to hold onto it for five years or more could see superior returns over the long run. Should you invest $1,000 in Novo Nordisk right now? Before you buy stock in Novo Nordisk, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Novo Nordisk wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Prosper Junior Bakiny has positions in Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. The Motley Fool recommends Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Healthcare Stocks That Are Losing to the S&P 500 This Year was originally published by The Motley Fool Connectez-vous pour accéder à votre portefeuille
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brains Aged Faster In 2021–2022: What Did The Pandemic Do To Us?
A new study suggests that the pandemic may have had a significant impact on our brains, whether or not we contracted COVID-19. Leveraging an extensive database of brain scans, British researchers say that people's brains showed accelerated aging during 2021 and 2022, including signs of shrinkage. While people who were infected with COVID also showed cognitive decline, like slower processing speed, the study was notable because it said even the non-infected were likely to experience harm to their brain. While the study did not delve into the exact causes of the accelerated aging, the study's first author, Ali-Reza Mohammadi-Nejad, a neuroimaging researcher at the University of Nottingham, theorizes that it may have been the result of stress and other factors. 'But it is likely that the cumulative experience of the pandemic—including psychological stress, social isolation, disruptions in daily life, reduced activity and wellness—contributed to the observed changes… In this sense, the pandemic period itself appears to have left a mark on our brains, even in the absence of infection,' said Mohammadi-Nejad, per NBC. The researchers found that males and 'those from more socioeconomically deprived backgrounds' experienced the most significant brain aging. Overall, the pandemic was thought to be linked to a 5.5-month acceleration in the aging process. This is not the first time researchers have reached similar conclusions. Last year, a previous study found that teenagers experienced dramatic brain aging during the pandemic. Notably, the study suggested that girls' brains aged 4.2 years faster and boys' brains aged 1.3 years faster, on average. The latest study does not indicate whether the structural changes identified in individuals who have never contracted COVID will result in any noticeable changes in brain function. Nor does the study confirm whether the physical changes will persist over the long term, says Adam Brickman, a professor of neuropsychology at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, who was not involved in the study.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
John Swinney pays tribute to Scottish woman who lost battle with anorexia aged 20
First Minister John Swinney has paid tribute to a young Scottish constituent who sadly lost her battle with anorexia earlier this year. The first minister attended a charity park run, which was organised by the family of Rachel Bywater from Aberfeldy, to raise funds for BEAT, the UK's leading charity supporting those affected by eating disorders, reports The Record. Swinney joined the family of Rachel, who sadly died on May 17 this year aged just 20 years old, at the event which has raised an amazing £7,500 for the charity. READ MORE: Netflix viewers rush to watch 'compelling' BBC drama series set in Edinburgh READ MORE: Edinburgh's first 'queer cafe' announces closure as owners say 'this is only the beginning' The MSP for Perthshire North shared a snap of the group together sporting their, 'Run for Rachel' t-shirts and wrote: "A special privilege to join the family of Rachel Bywater - one of my constituents who faced an eating disorder and sadly died recently aged only 20 - to run a 5k and raise funds for Beat (Eating Disorders). "Wonderful to see so many in the #Aberfeldy community supporting today." Her father Dave Bywater added: "Thank you John, it was great to have your support and that of the community. 'I hope everyone who reads these posts can realise there is a family behind this who are suffering a tragic loss, and ignore the offensive responses you have received." Join Edinburgh Live's Whatsapp Community here and get the latest news sent straight to your messages. Ahead of the event her family wrote: "We will be installing a new bench on the River Bank for Rachel Bywater, who very sadly passed away on May 17th this year. "To mark the occasion a fund raiser will be held on the Sunday to raise funds for BEAT (Eating Disorders). All you have to do is walk, jog or run 1, 2 or 3 laps of the FeldyRoo Fitness Trail. "The choice is yours, all we want is everyone to get involved. You can fill in an entry form and pick up sponsorship form at any of the pubs - Fountain, Black Wach or Schiehallion. "Entry is totally free but raised sponsorship or donations on the day would be really appreciated no matter how little or large."
