Abstract Background Upadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase inhibitor that has recently been approved in England for the treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) though real-world data is lacking. Furthermore, there is very limited information available on patient reported experiences of treatment with a small molecule compared with biological therapies. The object of this study was to provide real-world data on the efficacy of upadacitinib in the treatment of IBD in conjugation with collecting specific patient-reported feedback on acceptability and experience of treatment with upadacitinib. Methods We prospectively collected data on all IBD patients treated with upadacitinib between November 2022 and November 2023 in a large NHS Trust serving approximately 1% of the population of England. The primary objective was to assess patient response to induction at 8 weeks (UC) and 12 weeks (CD). Demographic details, biochemical markers (faecal calprotectin and CRP) and disease activity scores were recorded. We also undertook a bespoke anonymised electronic survey to assess the patient experience and views on treatment with upadacitinib in comparison to previous treatments. Results Forty-two patients were included in the study (34 UC/8 CD). The average age was 41 (range 18-76) and 27 (64%) were male. 11/34 UC patients were biologic naïve. All CD patients were biologic experienced with the majority exposed to an anti-TNF, vedolizumab and ustekinumab. Overall, 34/40 (85%) patients responded to induction treatment based on disease activity scores (27 UC, 7CD), with 68% (22 UC, 5 CD) in remission. Data was missing for two patients. Response rates were similar between biologic naïve and biologic exposed patients (82% and 86% respectively). In the UC cohort, mean calprotectin at baseline improved from 1718ug/g (range 8-6000ug/g) to 311ug/g (4-3014ug/g). In the CD cohort, mean calprotectin improved from 1719ug/g (115-5874ug/g) to 314ug/g (4-917ug/g). 3/42 (7%) of patients discontinued upadacitinib due to disease progression with the remaining 93% continuing treatment. Our patient survey results revealed very high satisfaction with treatment (85%), with the vast majority preferring treatment with upadacitinib to their previous biological therapy. Conclusion In this real-world study, induction therapy with upadacitinib was well tolerated and demonstrated good efficacy with excellent response and remission rates in a mixed patient cohort that included many with highly refractory disease. No unexpected safety signals were seen. The patient experience was overwhelmingly positive. If this data is replicated in larger studies there is an increasingly strong rationale for introducing upadacitinib earlier in the sequencing of advanced therapies.