Search

Summary: Background: There is a known shortfall in hepatology service resources across England and Wales. Aim: To investigate early and late mortality following unscheduled admissions for severe liver disease, overall and by cause of death, and to determine how mortality is related to admissions to transplant centres, transplant surgery, hospital size, consultant specialty, patient socio‐demographics, seasonal and geographical factors. Methods: Cohorts of people with a first unscheduled admission for severe liver disease across England and Wales from 2004, based on record linkage of national inpatient and mortality data. Findings: Mortality for alcoholic liver disease and hepatic failure was 23.4% and 35.4% respectively at 60 days and 61.8% and 57.1% at 5 years. Standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) were extremely high at 60 days (184 and 117 respectively) and remained highly increased at 5 years (16.7 and 6.3). Mortality at 5 years was most elevated from liver disease, viral hepatitis and varices. The 60‐day mortality was significantly lower for patients seen by consultant hepatologists and gastroenterologists. Both early and late mortality were significantly reduced for patients admitted to transplant centres or larger hospitals, who received a liver transplant, or were resident in London. Early mortality was significantly higher for patients admitted in winter and autumn, while elevated mortality among the most vs least deprived quintile increased with longer follow‐up. Conclusions: The study shows a very poor prognosis for people with unscheduled hospitalisation for severe liver disease. The findings suggest that access to specialist expertise and services improves survival, both in the short and long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Complex clinical interventions are increasingly subject to evaluation by randomised trial linked to economic evaluation. However evaluations of policy initiatives tend to eschew experimental designs in favour of interpretative perspectives which rarely allow the economic evaluation methods used in clinical trials. As evidence of the cost effectiveness of such initiatives is critical in informing policy, it is important to explore whether conventional economic evaluation methods apply to experimental evaluations of policy initiatives. Methods We used mixed methods based on a quasi-experimental design to evaluate a policy initiative whose aim was to expedite the modernisation of gastroenterology endoscopy services in England. We compared 10 sites which had received funding and support to modernise their endoscopy services with 10 controls. We collected data from five waves of patients undergoing endoscopy. The economic component of the study compared sites by levels of investment in modernisation and patients' use of health service resources, time off work and health related quality of life. Results We found no statistically significant difference between intervention and control sites in investment in modernisation or any patient outcome including health. Conclusions This study highlights difficulties in applying the rigour of a randomised trial and associated technique of economic evaluation to a policy initiative. It nevertheless demonstrates the feasibility of using this approach although further work is needed to demonstrate its generalisability in other applications. The present application shows that the small incentives offered to intervention sites did not enhance modernisation of gastroenterology endoscopy services or improve patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To establish which major disorders are susceptible to increased mortality following acute admissions on weekends, compared with week days, and how this may be explained.Methods: Cohorts based on national administrative inpatient and mortality data for 14,168,443 hospitalised patients in England and 913,068 in Wales who were admitted for 66 disorders that were associated with at least 200 deaths within 30 days of acute admission. The main outcome measure was the weekend mortality effect (defined as the conventional mortality odds ratio for admissions on weekends compared with week days).Results: There were large, statistically significant weekend mortality effects (> 20%) in England for 22 of the 66 conditions and in both countries for 14. These 14 were 4 of 13 cancers (oesophageal, colorectal, lung and lymphomas); 4 of 13 circulatory disorders (angina, abdominal aortic aneurysm, peripheral vascular disease and arterial embolism & thrombosis); one of 8 respiratory disorders (pleural effusion); 2 of 12 gastrointestinal disorders (alcoholic and other liver disease); 2 of 3 ageing-related disorders (Alzheimer's disease and dementia); none of 7 trauma conditions; and one of 10 other disorders (acute renal failure). Across the disorders, 64% of the variation in weekend mortality effects in England and Wales was explained by reductions in admission rates at weekends and the medical disease category.Conclusions: The effect of weekend admission on 30 day mortality is seen mainly for cancers, some circulatory disorders, liver disease and a few other conditions which are mainly ageing- or cancer-related. Most of the increased mortality is associated with reduced admission rates at weekends and the medical disease category. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]