OBJECTIVES To quantify the risk glaucoma patients are at, having their eye treatment omitted on admission to non-ophthalmic wards at a tertiary referral centre. DESIGN A criterion audit surveying all adult inpatients on 13 wards at a tertiary referral centre on two separate dates to reduce convenient sample bias. SETTING A tertiary referral centre in the West Midlands of England. PARTICIPANTS All inpatients on 13 general medical and surgical wards were surveyed on two different dates. Glaucoma patients were identified by looking at electronic clinical letters. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Glaucoma patients were identified based on the electronic clinical letters. Their inpatient drug charts were scrutinized to determine whether their eye treatment was omitted. In case of omission, a standardized message was left with the drug chart notifying the team looking after the patient of the missing treatment. The response to the message prompt was noted two weeks later. RESULTS In total, 837 patients were surveyed. Thirty-one glaucoma patients were identified. Eighteen patients (58.06%) had their drops omitted. Out of the 18 patients, 16 (88.88%) had no documented indication for stopping regular glaucoma treatment. None of the 18 patients had an alternative treatment prescribed. CONCLUSIONS This audit confirms that eye drops are often overlooked on non-ophthalmic wards.