Søren Rud Kristensen
University of Manchester
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Søren Rud Kristensen.
Hypertension | 1983
E. B. Pedersen; N.J. Christensen; Poul Christensen; Peter T. Johannesen; H. J. Kornerup; Søren Rud Kristensen; Jørgen Glenn Lauritsen; Poul P. Leyssac; A. Rasmussen; M. Wohlert
Urinary excretion of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and F2 alpha (PGF2 alpha), plasma concentrations of renin, aldosterone, norepinephrine (NE) and epinephrine (E) were determined during pregnancy, 5 days, 3, and 6 months after delivery in preeclampsia, normotensive pregnant, and nonpregnant control subjects. The PGE2 was higher in normotensive pregnant control subjects than in nonpregnant subjects. In preeclampsia, PGE2 was reduced to nonpregnant level. PGF2 alpha was the same in preeclampsia and in normotensive pregnancy, but elevated when compared to the normotensive nonpregnant control group. Plasma concentrations of renin and aldosterone were increased during pregnancy, but considerably less in preeclampsia than during normotensive pregnancy. NE and E were the same as in nonpregnant subjects during both hypertensive and normotensive pregnancy. All parameters were normal 3 months after delivery. There were no correlations between PGE2, PGF2 alpha, plasma concentrations of renin, aldosterone, NE, or E and blood pressure level in third trimester either in preeclampsia or in normotensive pregnancy. PGE2 was positively correlated to plasma concentrations of renin. It is suggested that the lack of renal PGE2 in preeclampsia might be responsible for the decrease in renal blood flow and sodium excretion. It is hypothesized that preeclampsia is a state of prostaglandin deficiency. The changes in the renin-aldosterone system may be secondary to changes in prostaglandin concentration both in preeclampsia and normotensive pregnancy.
The New England Journal of Medicine | 2014
Søren Rud Kristensen; Rachel Meacock; Alex J Turner; Ruth Boaden; Ruth McDonald; Martin Roland; Matt Sutton
BACKGROUND A pay-for-performance program based on the Hospital Quality Incentive Demonstration was introduced in all hospitals in the northwest region of England in 2008 and was associated with a short-term (18-month) reduction in mortality. We analyzed the long-term effects of this program, called Advancing Quality. METHODS We analyzed 30-day in-hospital mortality among 1,825,518 hospital admissions for eight conditions, three of which were covered by the financial-incentive program. The hospitals studied included the 24 hospitals in the northwest region that were participating in the program and 137 elsewhere in England that were not participating. We used difference-in-differences regression analysis to compare risk-adjusted mortality for an 18-month period before the program was introduced with subsequent mortality in the short term (the first 18 months of the program) and the longer term (the next 24 months). RESULTS Throughout the short-term and the long-term periods, the performance of hospitals in the incentive program continued to improve and mortality for the three conditions covered by the program continued to fall. However, the reduction in mortality among patients with these conditions was greater in the control hospitals (those not participating in the program) than in the hospitals that were participating in the program (by 0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.3 to 1.2). By the end of the 42-month follow-up period, the reduced mortality in the participating hospitals was no longer significant (-0.1 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.6 to 0.3). From the short term to the longer term, the mortality for conditions not covered by the program fell more in the participating hospitals than in the control hospitals (by 1.2 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.4 to 2.0), raising the possibility of a positive spillover effect on care for conditions not covered by the program. CONCLUSIONS Short-term relative reductions in mortality for conditions linked to financial incentives in hospitals participating in a pay-for-performance program in England were not maintained.
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy | 2017
Rachel Meacock; Laura Anselmi; Søren Rud Kristensen; Tim Doran; Matt Sutton
Objective Patients admitted as emergencies to hospitals at the weekend have higher death rates than patients admitted on weekdays. This may be because the restricted service availability at weekends leads to selection of patients with greater average severity of illness. We examined volumes and rates of hospital admissions and deaths across the week for patients presenting to emergency services through two routes: (a) hospital Accident and Emergency departments, which are open throughout the week; and (b) services in the community, for which availability is more restricted at weekends. Method Retrospective observational study of all 140 non-specialist acute hospital Trusts in England analyzing 12,670,788 Accident and Emergency attendances and 4,656,586 emergency admissions (940,859 direct admissions from primary care and 3,715,727 admissions through Accident and Emergency) between April 2013 and February 2014.Emergency attendances and admissions to hospital and deaths in any hospital within 30 days of attendance or admission were compared for weekdays and weekends. Results Similar numbers of patients attended Accident and Emergency on weekends and weekdays. There were similar numbers of deaths amongst patients attending Accident and Emergency on weekend days compared with weekdays (378.0 vs. 388.3). Attending Accident and Emergency at the weekend was not associated with a significantly higher probability of death (risk-adjusted OR: 1.010). Proportionately fewer patients who attended Accident and Emergency at weekend were admitted to hospital (27.5% vs. 30.0%) and it is only amongst the subset of patients attending Accident and Emergency who were selected for admission to hospital that the probability of dying was significantly higher at the weekend (risk-adjusted OR: 1.054). The average volume of direct admissions from services in the community was 61% lower on weekend days compared to weekdays (1317 vs. 3404). There were fewer deaths following direct admission on weekend days than weekdays (35.9 vs. 80.8). The mortality rate was significantly higher at weekends amongst direct admissions (risk-adjusted OR: 1.212) due to the proportionately greater reduction in admissions relative to deaths. Conclusions There are fewer deaths following hospital admission at weekends. Higher mortality rates at weekends are found only amongst the subset of patients who are admitted. The reduced availability of primary care services and the higher Accident and Emergency admission threshold at weekends mean fewer and sicker patients are admitted at weekends than during the week. Extending services in hospitals and in the community at weekends may increase the number of emergency admissions and therefore lower mortality, but may not reduce the absolute number of deaths.
Acta Oto-laryngologica | 1992
N. W. Johannessen; Per Føge Jensen; Søren Rud Kristensen; Asger Juul
Nasal obstruction influences respiration during sleep, and nasal packing may be the cause of obstructive sleep apnoea. In order to investigate this phenomenon, perioperative nocturnal oxygen saturation was monitored for 3 nights with continuous, non-invasive pulse oximetry in 12 patients who had total nasal packs after septoplasty. Significant extension of nocturnal accumulated time of oxygen saturation less than 90% was demonstrated both during the first and second postoperative nights. The clinical significance of these results is as yet unknown, but the use of partial nasal packing in association with septoplasty is advocated and further investigations on nocturnal oxygen saturation are called for.
Health Economics | 2014
Rachel Meacock; Søren Rud Kristensen; Matt Sutton
Despite growing adoption of pay-for-performance (P4P) programmes in health care, there is remarkably little evidence on the cost-effectiveness of such schemes. We review the limited number of previous studies and critique the frameworks adopted and the narrow range of costs and outcomes considered, before proposing a new more comprehensive framework, which we apply to the first P4P scheme introduced for hospitals in England. We emphasise that evaluations of cost-effectiveness need to consider who the residual claimant is on any cost savings, the possibility of positive and negative spillovers, and whether performance improvement is a transitory or investment activity. Our application to the Advancing Quality initiative demonstrates that the incentive payments represented less than half of the £ 13 m total programme costs. By generating approximately 5200 quality-adjusted life years and £ 4.4 m of savings in reduced length of stay, we find that the programme was a cost-effective use of resources in its first 18 months.
Journal of Laryngology and Otology | 2015
Marlene Ersgaard Jellinge; Søren Rud Kristensen; Knud Larsen
BACKGROUND The treatment of traumatic tympanic membrane perforations varies in different investigations, ranging from observation to early surgical repair. The present study aimed to focus on the closure rate and the closure time in a group of patients treated with a watchful waiting policy. METHODS The study comprised 133 consecutive patients with a total of 137 perforations. Data were evaluated in terms of aetiology, location and size of perforation, audiometric findings, closure rate, and closure time. RESULTS The overall closure rate was 97 per cent. For patients with a known closure time within three months, the median closure time was between three and four weeks. The probability of spontaneous closure over time was further analysed with Kaplan-Meier plots, for those perforations with known closure times and for all perforations including those with unknown closure times. Perforation size was the only significant determining factor for closure time. CONCLUSION Small perforations had a high probability of spontaneous closure within three to four weeks, justifying a watchful waiting policy. Larger uncomplicated perforations might warrant early surgical repair, depending on the patients needs and the availability of surgery.
PLOS Medicine | 2016
William Whittaker; Laura Anselmi; Søren Rud Kristensen; Yiu-Shing Lau; Simon Bailey; Peter Bower; Katherine Checkland; Rebecca Elvey; Katy Rothwell; Jonathan Stokes; Damian Hodgson
Background Health services across the world increasingly face pressures on the use of expensive hospital services. Better organisation and delivery of primary care has the potential to manage demand and reduce costs for hospital services, but routine primary care services are not open during evenings and weekends. Extended access (evening and weekend opening) is hypothesized to reduce pressure on hospital services from emergency department visits. However, the existing evidence-base is weak, largely focused on emergency out-of-hours services, and analysed using a before-and after-methodology without effective comparators. Methods and Findings Throughout 2014, 56 primary care practices (346,024 patients) in Greater Manchester, England, offered 7-day extended access, compared with 469 primary care practices (2,596,330 patients) providing routine access. Extended access included evening and weekend opening and served both urgent and routine appointments. To assess the effects of extended primary care access on hospital services, we apply a difference-in-differences analysis using hospital administrative data from 2011 to 2014. Propensity score matching techniques were used to match practices without extended access to practices with extended access. Differences in the change in “minor” patient-initiated emergency department visits per 1,000 population were compared between practices with and without extended access. Populations registered to primary care practices with extended access demonstrated a 26.4% relative reduction (compared to practices without extended access) in patient-initiated emergency department visits for “minor” problems (95% CI -38.6% to -14.2%, absolute difference: -10,933 per year, 95% CI -15,995 to -5,866), and a 26.6% (95% CI -39.2% to -14.1%) relative reduction in costs of patient-initiated visits to emergency departments for minor problems (absolute difference: -£767,976, -£1,130,767 to -£405,184). There was an insignificant relative reduction of 3.1% in total emergency department visits (95% CI -6.4% to 0.2%). Our results were robust to several sensitivity checks. A lack of detailed cost reporting of the running costs of extended access and an inability to capture health outcomes and other health service impacts constrain the study from assessing the full cost-effectiveness of extended access to primary care. Conclusions The study found that extending access was associated with a reduction in emergency department visits in the first 12 months. The results of the research have already informed the decision by National Health Service England to extend primary care access across Greater Manchester from 2016. However, further evidence is needed to understand whether extending primary care access is cost-effective and sustainable.
BMJ Quality & Safety | 2017
Laura Anselmi; Rachel Meacock; Søren Rud Kristensen; Tim Doran; Matt Sutton
Background Studies finding higher mortality rates for patients admitted to hospital at weekends rely on routine administrative data to adjust for risk of death, but these data may not adequately capture severity of illness. We examined how rates of patient arrival at accident and emergency (A&E) departments by ambulance—a marker of illness severity—were associated with in-hospital mortality by day and time of attendance. Methods Retrospective observational study of 3 027 946 admissions to 140 non-specialist hospital trusts in England between April 2013 and February 2014. Patient admissions were linked with A&E records containing mode of arrival and date and time of attendance. We classified arrival times by day of the week and daytime (07:00 to 18:59) versus night (19:00 to 06:59 the following day). We examined the association with in-hospital mortality within 30 days using multivariate logistic regression. Results Over the week, 20.9% of daytime arrivals were in the highest risk quintile compared with 18.5% for night arrivals. Daytime arrivals on Sundays contained the highest proportion of patients in the highest risk quintile at 21.6%. Proportions of admitted patients brought in by ambulance were substantially higher at night and higher on Saturday (61.1%) and Sunday (60.1%) daytimes compared with other daytimes in the week (57.0%). Without adjusting for arrival by ambulance, risk-adjusted mortality for patients arriving at night was higher than for daytime attendances on Wednesday (0.16 percentage points). Compared with Wednesday daytime, risk-adjusted mortality was also higher on Thursday night (0.15 percentage points) and increased throughout the weekend from Saturday daytime (0.16 percentage points) to Sunday night (0.26 percentage points). After adjusting for arrival by ambulance, the raised mortality only reached statistical significance for patients arriving at A&E on Sunday daytime (0.17 percentage points). Conclusion Using conventional risk-adjustment methods, there appears to be a higher risk of mortality following emergency admission to hospital at nights and at weekends. After accounting for mode of arrival at hospital, this pattern changes substantially, with no increased risk of mortality following admission at night or for any period of the weekend apart from Sunday daytime. This suggests that risk-adjustment based on inpatient administrative data does not adequately account for illness severity and that elevated mortality at weekends and at night reflects a higher proportion of more severely ill patients arriving by ambulance at these times.
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy | 2016
Jonathan Stokes; Katherine Checkland; Søren Rud Kristensen
‘Integrated care’ is pitched as the solution to current health system challenges. In the literature, what integrated care actually involves is complex and contested. Multi-disciplinary team case management is frequently the primary focus of integrated care when implemented internationally. We examine the practical application of integrated care in the NHS in England to exemplify the prevalence of the case management focus. We look at the evidence for effectiveness of multi-disciplinary team case management, for the focus on high-risk groups and for integrated care more generally. We suggest realistic expectations of what integration of care alone can achieve and additional research questions.
BMJ Open | 2016
Jonathan Stokes; Søren Rud Kristensen; Katherine Checkland; Peter Bower
Objectives To evaluate a multidisciplinary team (MDT) case management intervention, at the individual (direct effects of intervention) and practice levels (potential spillover effects). Design Difference-in-differences design with multiple intervention start dates, analysing hospital admissions data. In secondary analyses, we stratified individual-level results by risk score. Setting Single clinical commissioning group (CCG) in the UKs National Health Service (NHS). Participants At the individual level, we matched 2049 intervention patients using propensity scoring one-to-one with control patients. At the practice level, 30 practices were compared using a natural experiment through staged implementation. Intervention Practice Integrated Care Teams (PICTs), using MDT case management of high-risk patients together with a summary record of care versus usual care. Direct and indirect outcome measures Primary measures of intervention effects were accident and emergency (A&E) visits; inpatient non-elective stays, 30-day re-admissions; inpatient elective stays; outpatient visits; and admissions for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. Secondary measures included inpatient length of stay; total cost of secondary care services; and patient satisfaction (at the practice level only). Results At the individual level, we found slight, clinically trivial increases in inpatient non-elective admissions (+0.01 admissions per patient per month; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.01. Effect size (ES): 0.02) and 30-day re-admissions (+0.00; 0.00 to 0.01. ES: 0.03). We found no indication that highest risk patients benefitted more from the intervention. At the practice level, we found a small decrease in inpatient non-elective admissions (−0.63 admissions per 1000 patients per month; −1.17 to −0.09. ES: −0.24). However, this result did not withstand a robustness check; the estimate may have absorbed some differences in underlying practice trends. Conclusions The intervention does not meet its primary aim, and the clinical significance and cost-effectiveness of these small practice-level effects is debatable. There is an ongoing need to develop effective ways to reduce unnecessary attendances in secondary care for the high-risk population.