Clinical audit is not a process defined as "a quality improvement process aimed at improving patient care and outcomes through systemic review of care against explicit criteria and implementation changes: say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essay Professor David Johnson defined auditing as “a means of controlling the quality of medical practice by which the profession must regulate its activities with the aim of improving all of its activities. patient care” Thus, when it comes to the field of medicine, it becomes the means that represents the quality control of medical practice, in surgical audit. In light of his philosophy, auditing emerged and evolved to meet needs and interests. This quality should help administrators prepare sufficient resources for these important movements. Maintaining quality and enforcing it is difficult, so we need to measure the differences in outcome. A good surgeon must never hide his faults but must learn from them in order to give the best of himself to his patients and improve his practice. It also upholds the prevention and restriction of malpractice and promotes patient care as an outcome. Clinical audits combined with feedback are a well-established quality improvement intervention, acceptable to practitioners and widely used in primary care. The term audit is usually associated with accounting and involves the digital examination by an investigator for fraud prevention, but in clinical settings it is the collection of data for the purpose of establishing professional standards, d evaluate clinical performance and modify clinical practice2. The evidence that quality assessment and quality assurance audits have improved medical practices is not much stronger than it has shown that the purpose of auditing and the role of auditors is constantly changing and that auditing is constantly evolving6. Ernest Hey Amory Codman introduced Clinical Auditing to the United States (1910)7. Many studies suggest that medical care evaluation studies have a marginal effect on the practitioner. A study on the pre-development of inspection for clinical audit is only available in a few hospitals. Daily management of a surgical audit is not a regular practice. Therefore, appropriate clinical data are not available that can be reviewed and analyzed in terms of morbidity, mortality and other clinical outcomes, in order to improve overall clinical practice2. This study will allow us to see morbidity and mortality. This study will also provide planning and idea for future risk management from the current medical/surgical record. The aim of the study is to narrate the analysis of all admitted cases and mortality in the surgical department of Bhurgri Matli Hospital. This audit was carried out at the general surgery department of Bhurgri Matli hospital, from July 2014 to November 2017. The data for this study were collected from computer software (hospital management software) and a form containing basic patient information, statistical data, mode of admission to the surgical department like emergency or outpatient department or referred from another clinic for management i.e. operation or conservative treatment, the result of management, that is, cured. , referral or death. Admission details were recorded using software.