Daniel Lasserson

Prof. Daniel Lasserson

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
6 July 2016 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NHNathan R. Hill
Nathan R. Hill
SFSamuel T. Fatoba
Samuel T. Fatoba
JOJason L. Oke
Jason L. Oke
JHJennifer A. Hirst
Jennifer A. Hirst
COChristopher A. O’callaghan
Christopher A. O’callaghan
FHF. D. Richard Hobbs
F. D. Richard Hobbs
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health burden with a high economic cost to health systems and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). All stages of CKD are associated with increased risks of cardiovascular morbidity, premature mortality, and/or decreased quality of life. CKD is usually asymptomatic until later stages and accurate prevalence data are lacking. Thus we sought to determine the prevalence of CKD globally, by stage, geographical location, gender and age. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies estimating CKD prevalence in general populations was conducted through literature searches in 8 databases. We assessed pooled data using a random effects model. Of 5,842 potential articles, 100 studies of diverse quality were included, comprising 6,908,440 patients. Global mean(95%CI) CKD prevalence of 5 stages 13·4%(11·7–15·1%), and stages 3–5 was 10·6%(9·2–12·2%). Weighting by study quality did not affect prevalence estimates. CKD prevalence by stage was Stage-1 (eGFR>90+ACR>30): 3·5% (2·8–4·2%); Stage-2 (eGFR 60–89+ACR>30): 3·9% (2·7–5·3%); Stage-3 (eGFR 30–59): 7·6% (6·4–8·9%); Stage-4 = (eGFR 29–15): 0·4% (0·3–0·5%); and Stage-5 (eGFR<15): 0·1% (0·1–0·1%). CKD has a high global prevalence with a consistent estimated global CKD prevalence of between 11 to 13% with the majority stage 3. Future research should evaluate intervention strategies deliverable at scale to delay the progression of CKD and improve CVD outcomes.

1 July 2022 in Health Technology Assessment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JRJoanne Reeve
Joanne Reeve
MMMichelle Maden
Michelle Maden
RHRuaraidh Hill
Ruaraidh Hill
ATAmadea Turk
Amadea Turk
KMKamal Mahtani
Kamal Mahtani
EREd Ranson
Ed Ranson
Background: Tackling problematic polypharmacy requires tailoring the use of medicines to individual needs and circumstances. This may involve stopping medicines (deprescribing) but patients and clinicians report uncertainty on how best to do this. The TAILOR medication synthesis sought to help understand how best to support deprescribing in older people living with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Objectives: We identified two research questions: (1) what evidence exists to support the safe, effective and acceptable stopping of medication in this patient group, and (2) how, for whom and in what contexts can safe and effective tailoring of clinical decisions related to medication use work to produce desired outcomes? We thus described three objectives: (1) to undertake a robust scoping review of the literature on stopping medicines in this group to describe what is being done, where and for what effect; (2) to undertake a realist synthesis review to construct a programme theory that describes ‘best practice’ and helps explain the heterogeneity of deprescribing approaches; and (3) to translate findings into resources to support tailored prescribing in clinical practice. Data sources: Experienced information specialists conducted comprehensive searches in MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Joanna Briggs Institute Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Google (Google Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA) and Google Scholar (targeted searches). Review methods: The scoping review followed the five steps described by the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for conducting a scoping review. The realist review followed the methodological and publication standards for realist reviews described by the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) group. Patient and public involvement partners ensured that our analysis retained a patient-centred focus. Results: Our scoping review identified 9528 abstracts: 8847 were removed at screening and 662 were removed at full-text review. This left 20 studies (published between 2009 and 2020) that examined the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of deprescribing in adults (aged ≥ 50 years) with polypharmacy (five or more prescribed medications) and multimorbidity (two or more conditions). Our analysis revealed that deprescribing under research conditions mapped well to expert guidance on the steps needed for good clinical practice. Our findings offer evidence-informed support to clinicians regarding the safety, clinician acceptability and potential effectiveness of clinical decision-making that demonstrates a structured approach to deprescribing decisions. Our realist review identified 2602 studies with 119 included in the final analysis. The analysis outlined 34 context–mechanism–outcome configurations describing the knowledge work of tailored prescribing under eight headings related to organisational, health-care professional and patient factors, and interventions to improve deprescribing. We conclude that robust tailored deprescribing requires attention to providing an enabling infrastructure, access to data, tailored explanations and trust. Limitations: Strict application of our definition of multimorbidity during the scoping review may have had an impact on the relevance of the review to clinical practice. The realist review was limited by the data (evidence) available. Conclusions: Our combined reviews recognise deprescribing as a complex intervention and provide support for the safety of structured approaches to deprescribing, but also highlight the need to integrate patient-centred and contextual factors into best practice models. Future work: The TAILOR study has informed new funded research tackling deprescribing in sleep management, and professional education. Further research is being developed to implement tailored prescribing into routine primary care practice. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018107544 and PROSPERO CRD42018104176. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 32. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

1 April 2017 in BMJ Open
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
FMFiona MacKichan
Fiona MacKichan
EBEmer Brangan
Emer Brangan
LWLesley Wye
Lesley Wye
KCKath Checkland
Kath Checkland
DLDaniel Lasserson
Daniel Lasserson
SPSarah Purdy
Sarah Purdy
Objectives To describe how processes of primary care access influence decisions to seek help at the emergency department (ED). Design Ethnographic case study combining non-participant observation, informal and formal interviewing. Setting Six general practitioner (GP) practices located in three commissioning organisations in England. Participants and methods Reception areas at each practice were observed over the course of a working week (73 hours in total). Practice documents were collected and clinical and non-clinical staff were interviewed (n=19). Patients with recent ED use, or a carer if aged 16 and under, were interviewed (n=29). Results Past experience of accessing GP care recursively informed patient decisions about where to seek urgent care, and difficulties with access were implicit in patient accounts of ED use. GP practices had complicated, changeable systems for appointments. This made navigating appointment booking difficult for patients and reception staff, and engendered a mistrust of the system. Increasingly, the telephone was the instrument of demand management, but there were unintended consequences for access. Some patient groups, such as those with English as an additional language, were particularly disadvantaged, and the varying patient and staff semantic of words like ‘urgent’ and ‘emergency’ was exacerbated during telephone interactions. Poor integration between in-hours and out-of-hours care and patient perceptions of the quality of care accessible at their GP practice also informed ED use. Conclusions This study provides important insight into the implicit role of primary care access on the use of ED. Discourses around ‘inappropriate’ patient demand neglect to recognise that decisions about where to seek urgent care are based on experiential knowledge. Simply speeding up access to primary care or increasing its volume is unlikely to alleviate rising ED use. Systems for accessing care need to be transparent, perceptibly fair and appropriate to the needs of diverse patient groups.

22 May 2017 in International Journal of Older People Nursing
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SGSiobhan Gardiner
Siobhan Gardiner
MGMargaret Glogowska
Margaret Glogowska
CSCatherine Stoddart
Catherine Stoddart
SPSarah Pendlebury
Sarah Pendlebury
DLDaniel Lasserson
Daniel Lasserson
DJDebra Jackson
Debra Jackson
Aim: To examine qualitative research exploring older people's experiences of falling and the perceived risk of falling in the community. This will contribute new insights into how falling is perceived by the older community.Background: Falls are a major problem for older people and healthcare services across the world. Accidental falls in the community are a persistent problem that is generally recognised as an intrinsic risk of ageing. This review provides a new synthesis of evidence that considers older people's perception of falls in the community as new insights are needed if the increasing problems of falls are to be addressed.Design: Synthesis of the qualitative literature employing Noblit and Hare's method of reciprocal translation. CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE, PsychINFO and BNI were searched 1999–2015.Methods: Noblit and Hare's method of reciprocal translations was used to conceive this meta‐ethnographic synthesis. The ENTREQ statement was employed as a tool for reporting the synthesis of qualitative research. The PRISMA statement was used for reporting the different phase of the literature search, and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative research checklist was used as an appraisal framework.Results: Eleven papers fit the inclusion criteria and revealed a series of themes. These were falls as a threat to personal identity, falls as a threat to independence, falls as a threat to social interaction and carefulness as a protective strategy.Conclusion: Many older people reject the label of “at risk of falling” because of the perceived implication of dependency and incompetence. To be considered “at risk” of falling is perceived as threatening the identity of individuals who are comfortable maintaining their own independence. However, there are also those who accept the risk of falling and in doing so choose carefulness as a personal strategy to manage the risk. For the majority of older people, maintaining independence is the key motivator influencing their actions. Independence to pursue social interaction safeguards against loss of identity, social isolation and negative feelings of dependency. Falling in the community is a problem that persists, despite intervention of local health teams. This article contributes to a body of evidence on older people's experience of falling in the community with the aim of providing new insights for nurses as they approach the issues with patients.Implications for practice: Management of falls risk improves through constructive, proactive health behaviour. Promoting a positive attitude towards living well encourages older people to engage in healthy, risk reducing behaviours. Older people reject the designation of “at risk of falling” due to a perceived association with dependency and incompetence. The negative association is a barrier to engaging at‐risk populations with fall prevention interventions.

13 November 2017 in The Annals of Family Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PTPeter Tammes
Peter Tammes
SPSarah Purdy
Sarah Purdy
CSChris Salisbury
Chris Salisbury
FMFiona MacKichan
Fiona MacKichan
DLDaniel Lasserson
Daniel Lasserson
RMRichard Morris
Richard Morris
PURPOSE Secondary health care services have been under considerable pressure in England as attendance rates increase, resulting in longer waiting times and greater demands on staff. This study’s aim was to examine the association between continuity of care and risk of emergency hospital admission among older adults. METHODS We analyzed records from 10,000 patients aged 65 years and older in 2012 within 297 English general practices obtained from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink and linked with Hospital Episode Statistics. We used the Bice and Boxerman (BB) index and the appointed general practitioner index (last general practitioner consulted before hospitalization) to quantify patient-physician continuity. The BB index was used in a prospective cohort approach to assess impact of continuity on risk of admission. Both indices were used in a separate retrospective nested case-control approach to test the effect of changing physician on the odds of hospital admission in the following 30 days. RESULTS In the prospective cohort analysis, the BB index showed a graded, non-significant inverse relationship of continuity of care with risk of emergency hospital admission, although the hazard ratio for patients experiencing least continuity was 2.27 (95% CI, 1.37–3.76) compared with those having complete continuity. In the retrospective nested case-control analysis, we found a graded inverse relationship between continuity of care and emergency hospital admission for both BB and appointed general practitioner indices: for the latter, the odds ratio for those experiencing least continuity was 2.32 (95% CI, 1.48–3.63) relative to those experiencing most continuity. CONCLUSIONS Marked discontinuity of care might contribute to increased unplanned hospital admissions among patients aged 65 years and older. Schemes to enhance continuity of care have the potential to reduce hospital admissions.

21 January 2018 in BMJ Open
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
BNBrian D Nicholson
Brian D Nicholson
JOJason Oke
Jason Oke
CSClaire Friedemann Smith
Claire Friedemann Smith
JPJulie-Ann Phillips
Julie-Ann Phillips
JLJennifer Lee
Jennifer Lee
FGFergus Gleeson
Fergus Gleeson
Introduction Cancer survival in England lags behind most European countries, due partly to lower rates of early stage diagnosis. We report the protocol for the evaluation of a multidisciplinary diagnostic centre-based pathway for the investigation of ‘low-risk but not no-risk’ cancer symptoms called the Suspected CANcer (SCAN) pathway. SCAN is a new standard of care being implemented in Oxfordshire; one of a number of pathways implemented during the second wave of the Accelerate, Coordinate, Evaluate (ACE) programme, an initiative which aims to improve England’s cancer survival rates through establishing effective routes to early diagnosis. Methods and analysis To evaluate SCAN, we are collating a prospective database of patients referred onto the pathway by their general practitioner (GP). Patients aged over 40 years, with non-specific symptoms such as weight loss or fatigue, who do not meet urgent cancer referral criteria or for whom symptom causation remains unclear after investigation via other existing pathways, can be referred to SCAN. SCAN provides rapid CT scanning, laboratory testing and clinic review within 2 weeks. We will follow all patients in the primary and secondary care record for at least 2 years. The data will be used to understand the diagnostic yield of the SCAN pathway in the short term (28 days) and the long term (2 years). Routinely collected primary and secondary care data from patients not referred to SCAN but with similar symptoms will also be used to evaluate SCAN. We will map the routes to diagnosis for patients referred to SCAN to assess cost-effectiveness. Acceptability will be evaluated using patient and GP surveys. Ethics and dissemination The Oxford Joint Research Office Study Classification Group has judged this to be a service evaluation and so outside of research governance. The results of this project will be disseminated by peer-reviewed publication and presentation at conferences.