Chest drains are indicated for pleural effusions and pneumothoraces. Documentation of chest drain insertion in patients' notes can vary and may be sub-standard. We did a retrospective audit of documentation of chest drain insertions and repeated it after the introduction of a chest drain pro forma. Patients and Methods: All chest drain insertions over a two-year period (2017-2019) in our hospital were audited. Indwelling pleural catheter insertions were excluded. We re-audited chest drains inserted in the respiratory ward for 3 months (January-March 2020) after the introduction of a chest drain pro forma to assess improvements in documentation. Results: In the first audit, 134 patients had chest drains [85(63%) male; age 18-91 years]; 16 of these were emergency procedures. Documentation of chest drain insertion procedures was poor. In 12(9%), the procedure was not recorded at all. One or more preprocedural safety checks (indication, review of radiology, coagulation parameters) were documented in 23(17.2%) procedures. In 11 (8.2%) the department/unit where the procedure was performed was not documented. In 30(22.4%) the time of the procedure was not entered. The grade and speciality of doctor performing the procedure was missing in 18(13.4%) and 13(9.7%) entries, respectively. Patient consent was available for 90(67.2%) procedures (61 verbal, 29 written). Adherence to aseptic technique was mentioned in 66 (49.2%), and the dose of local anaesthetic was included in 82(46.3%) entries. Re-audit following the introduction of a pro forma in respiratory ward (n=29) showed improvements in documentation. There was a significant improvement in the documentation of preprocedural checks (59.8% vs 19.4%), and a positive trend in documentation of consent and the use of local anaesthetic. Conclusion: Documentation of chest drain insertion procedures can vary and may be incomplete. Routine use of a pro forma improves documentation of chest drain insertion procedures and should enhance overall patient safety.