Medication Reconciliation at Discharge from Hospital: A Systematic Review of the Quantitative Literature

Enhancing the quality of medicine handover at hospital discharge: a priority setting workshop

BACKGROUND

When a patient is discharged from hospital it is essential that their general practitioner (GPs) and community pharmacist are informed of changes to their medicines. This necessitates effective communication and information-sharing between hospitals and primary care clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

To identify priority medicine handover issues and solutions to inform the co-design and development of a multifaceted intervention.

METHOD

A modified nominal group technique was used to reach consensus on medicine handover priority areas. The first hour of an interactive 2-hr workshop focused on ranking pre-identified issues drawn from literature. In the second hour, participants identified solutions that they then ranked from highest to lowest priority through an online platform. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse workshop data.

RESULTS

In total 32 participants attended the workshop including hospital doctors (n = 8, 25.0%), GPs and hospital pharmacists (n = 6 each, 18.8%), consumers and community pharmacists (n = 4 each, 12.5%), and both hospital and aged care facility nurses (n = 2 each 6.3%). From the list of 23 issues, the highest ranked issue was high workload and time pressures impacting the discharge process (22/32). From the list of 36 solutions, the participants identified two solutions that were equally ranked highest (12/27 each). They were mandating that patients leave hospital with a discharge summary, including medication reconciliation information and, developing an integrated information technology system where medication summary and notes are accessible for primary, secondary and tertiary health provider.

CONCLUSION

The consensus process highlighted challenges in hospital procedures where potential solutions may be implemented through co-design of a multifaceted intervention to improve medicine handover quality.

Global research trends of home pharmaceutical care: a bibliometric analysis via CiteSpace

Background

This study aimed to systematically review the research on home pharmaceutical care and to identify emerging trends and research hotspots using bibliometric methods.

Methods

Publications related to home pharmaceutical care, published from inception to 6 February 2025, were extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC). The bibliometric tool CiteSpace was employed to analyze various metrics, including the number of publications, contributing countries, institutions, authors, keywords, cited references, and research trends in the field of home pharmaceutical care.

Results

A total of 812 relevant articles were retrieved from the WoSCC. The most prolific contributors were Hughes CM, Nishtala, PS, and Lapane KL. The United States emerged as the leading country in the field, with Queen's University Belfast identified as the most productive institution. The keyword with the highest frequency was "pharmaceutical care." The research hotspots in this field were centered around "polypharmacy," "medication reconciliation," and "drug-related problems."

Conclusion

This study utilized CiteSpace to analyze research trends and hotspots in the field of home pharmaceutical care. The findings suggest that "polypharmacy" and "care homes" are likely to become focal points of future research. Additionally, the development of research in developing countries lags behind that in developed countries. Therefore, it is crucial for developing countries to learn from the advances made by developed nations in this field, and to foster greater international collaboration and research efforts.

Yeung SY, Stollings JL. Effect of Inpatient Pharmacist-Led Medication Reconciliations on Medication-Related Interventions in Intensive Care Unit Recovery Centers

Background: Critical care pharmacists complete comprehensive medication reviews in Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS) patients at Intensive Care Unit Recovery Centers (ICU-RCs) to optimize medication therapies after hospital discharge. Inpatient pharmacists often complete medication reconciliations prior to hospital discharge, which could affect interventions at an ICU-RC. However, this association remains ill-described. Objective: The purpose of this study was to, in patients with PICS, describe the effect of an inpatient, pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on the number of clinical pharmacist interventions at the first ICU-RC visit. Methods: This was a post-hoc subgroup analysis of an international, multicenter cohort study of adults who had a pharmacist-led comprehensive medication reconciliation conducted in 12 ICU-RCs. Only patients' first ICU-RC visit was eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was the number of medication interventions made at initial ICU-RC visit in PICS patients who had an inpatient, pharmacist-led medication reconciliation compared to those who did not. Results: Of 323 patients included, 83 received inpatient medication reconciliations and 240 did not. No difference was observed in the median number of medication interventions between groups (2 vs 2, p = .06). However, a higher incidence of any intervention (86.3% vs 78.3%, p = .09) and dose adjustment (20.4% vs 9.6%; p = .03) was observed in the no medication reconciliation group. Only ICU Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was associated with an increased odds of medication intervention at ICU-RC visit (aOR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05-1.25, p < .01). Conclusion and Relevance: No difference in the total number of medication interventions made by ICU-RC clinical pharmacists was observed in patients who received an inpatient, pharmacist-led medication reconciliation before hospital discharge compared to those who did not. Still, clinical observations within this study highlight the continued importance and study of clinical pharmacist involvement during transitions of care, including ICU-RC visits.

Prescription of potentially inappropriate medications after an intensive care unit stay for acute respiratory failure

BACKGROUND

Among survivors of critical illness, prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) at hospital discharge is thought to be an important, modifiable patient safety concern. To date, there are little empirical data evaluating this issue.

RESEARCH QUESTION

The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of PIM prescribed to survivors of acute respiratory failure (ARF) at hospital discharge and explore their association with readmissions or death within 90 days of hospital discharge.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Prospective multicenter cohort study of ARF survivors admitted to ICUs and discharged home. Prospective of new PIMs with a high-adverse-effect profile ("high impact") at discharge was the primary exposure. Potential inappropriateness was determined by a structured consensus process using Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions-Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment, Beers' criteria, and clinical context of prescriptions by a multidisciplinary team. Covariate balancing propensity score was used for the primary analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 195 Addressing Post Intensive Care Syndrome-01 (APICS-01) patients, 169 (87%) had ≥1 new medications prescribed at discharge, with 154 (91.1%) prescribed with one or more high-impact (HI) medications. Patients were prescribed a median of 5 [3-7] medications, of which 3 [1-4] were HI. Twenty percent of HI medications were potentially inappropriate. Medications with significant central nervous system side-effects were most prescribed potentially inappropriately. Forty-six (30%) patients experienced readmission or death within 90 days of hospital discharge. After adjusting for prespecified covariates, the association between prescription of potentially inappropriate HI medications and the composite primary outcome did not meet the prespecified threshold for statistical significance (risk ratio: 0.54; 0.26-1.13; p = 0.095) or with the constituent endpoints: readmission (risk ratio: 0.57, 0.27-1.11) or death (0.7, 0.05-9.32).

CONCLUSION

At hospital discharge, most ARF survivors are prescribed medications with a high-adverse-effect profile and approximately one-fifth are potentially inappropriate. Although prescription of such medications was not associated with 90-day readmissions and mortality, these results highlight an area for additional investigation.

Discrepancies in Electronic Medical Prescriptions Found in a Hospital Emergency Department: A Prospective Observational Study

The medication in an electronic prescribing system (EPS) does not always match the patient's actual medication. This prospective study analyzes the discrepancies (any inconsistency) between medication prescribed using an EPS and the medication revised by the clinical pharmacist upon admission to the observation area of the emergency department (ED). Adult patients with multimorbidity and/or polypharmacy were included. The pharmacist used multiple sources to obtain the revised medication list, including patient/carer interviews. A total of 1654 discrepancies were identified among 1131 patients. Of these patients, 64.5% had ≥1 discrepancy. The most common types of discrepancy were differences in posology (43.6%), commission (34.7%), and omission (20.9%). Analgesics (11.1%), psycholeptics (10.0%), and diuretics (8.9%) were the most affected. Furthermore, 52.5% of discrepancies affected medication that was high-alert for patients with chronic illnesses and 42.0% of medication involved withdrawal syndromes. Discrepancies increased with the number of drugs (ρ = 0.44, p < 0.01) and there was a difference between non-polypharmacy patients, polypharmacy ones and those with extreme polypharmacy (p < 0.01). Those aged over 75 years had a higher number of prescribed medications and discrepancies occurred more frequently compared with younger patients. The number of discrepancies was larger in women than in men. The EPS medication record requires verification from additional sources, including patient and/or carer interviews.

Effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on medication errors at hospital discharge and healthcare utilization in the next 30 days: a pragmatic clinical trial

Transitions of care often lead to medication errors and unnecessary healthcare utilization. Medication reconciliation has been repeatedly shown to reduce this risk. However, the great majority of evidence is limited to the provision of medication reconciliation within clinical trials and countries with well-established clinical pharmacy. Thus, this pragmatic, prospective, controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of routine pharmacist-led medication reconciliation compared to standard care on medication errors and unplanned healthcare utilization in adult general medical patients hospitalized in a teaching hospital in Slovenia. All patients hospitalized in a ward where medication reconciliation was integrated into routine clinical practice were included in the intervention group and received admission and discharge medication reconciliation, coupled with patient counselling. The control group consisted of randomly selected patients from the remaining medical wards. The primary study outcome was unplanned healthcare utilization within 30 days of discharge, and the secondary outcomes were clinically important medication errors at hospital discharge and serious unplanned healthcare utilization within 30 days of discharge. Overall, 414 patients (53.4% male, median 71 years) were included-225 in the intervention group and 189 in the control group. In the intervention group, the number of patients with clinically important medication errors at discharge was significantly lower (intervention vs control group: 9.3% vs 61.9%). Multiple logistic regression revealed that medication reconciliation reduced the likelihood of a clinically important medication error by 20-fold, while a higher number of medications on admission was associated with an increased likelihood. However, no significant differences were noted in any and serious unplanned healthcare utilization (intervention vs control group: 33.9% vs 27.8% and 20.3% vs 14.6%, respectively). The likelihood of serious healthcare utilization increased with the age of the patient, the number of medications on admission and being hospitalized for an acute medical condition. Our pragmatic trial confirmed that medication reconciliation, even when performed as part of routine clinical practice, led to a substantial reduction in the risk of clinically important medication errors at hospital discharge but not to a reduction in healthcare utilization. Medication reconciliation is a fundamental, albeit not sufficient, element to ensure patient safety after hospital discharge. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/search?id=NCT06207500, identifier NCT06207500.

Prevented harm and cost avoidance with pharmacist intervention while utilizing a discharge medication reconciliation tool

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine prevented harm and cost avoidance following pharmacist intervention utilizing a discharge medication reconciliation tool.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify patients with pharmacist-initiated, provider-accepted discharge medication reconciliation interventions completed at a community teaching hospital in January 2021. Investigators assigned the discrepancies targeted for intervention a National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) category, probability of harm, and calculated cost avoidance. The primary endpoint was the total cost avoidance associated with discharge medication reconciliation.

RESULTS

Pharmacists intervened 190 times in January 2021, avoiding an estimated $46,958 to $231,032 in cost. High-risk medications were associated with $33,920 to $147,203 in cost avoidance. The 3 high-risk therapeutic classes associated with the highest cost avoidance were insulin ($16,738-$70,793), antithrombotics ($13,884-$60,016), and opioids ($2,638-$11,834).

CONCLUSION

Targeted pharmacist discharge medication reconciliation and related interventions avoid significant cost and patient harm.

COVID-19 Patients' Medication Management during Transition of Care from Hospital to Virtual Care: A Cross-Sectional Survey and Audit

BACKGROUND

Virtual models of care were implemented to ease hospital bed pressure during COVID-19. We evaluated the medication management of COVID-19 patients transferred to virtual models of care.

METHOD

A retrospective audit of COVID-19 patients transferred from inpatient units to virtual care during January 2022 and surveys from patients transferred during December 2021-February 2022 was carried out.

RESULTS

One hundred patients were randomly selected: mean age 59 years (SD: 19.8), mean number of medicines at admission 4.3 (SD: 4.03), mean length of virtual ward stay 4.4 days (SD: 2.1). Pharmacists reviewed 43% (43/100) of patients' medications during their hospital stay and provided 29% (29/100) with discharge medicine lists at transfer. Ninety-two (92%) patients were prescribed at least one new high-risk medicine whilst in hospital, but this was not a factor considered to receive a pharmacist medication review. Forty patients (40%) were discharged on newly commenced high-risk medicines, and this was also not a factor in receiving a pharmacist discharge medication list. In total, 25% of patient surveys (96/378) were returned: 70% (66/96) reported adequate medicine information at transfer and 55% (52/96) during the virtual model period.

CONCLUSION

Patient survey data show overall positive experiences of medication management and support. Audit data highlight gaps in medication management during the transfer to a virtual model, highlighting the need for patient prioritisation.

Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge: A qualitative exploration of acute care nurses' perceptions of their roles and responsibilities

BACKGROUND

Safe medication management is a cornerstone of nursing practice. Nurses prepare patients for discharge which includes the ongoing safe administration of medications. Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is an interprofessional activity that helps to identify and rectify medication discrepancies or errors to ensure the accuracy and completeness of discharge medications and information. Nurses have a role in medication safety; however, their involvement in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is poorly described. The study's aim was to describe acute care nurses' perceptions of their roles and responsibilities in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge, including barriers and enablers.

DESIGN

Using focus groups, this exploratory descriptive study gathered qualitative data from nurses working in five acute care clinical units (medical, surgical and transit/discharge lounge) at a tertiary Australian hospital. The data were analysed using inductive content analysis and reported following the COREQ checklist.

RESULTS

Thirty-two nurses were recruited. Three themes emerged from the data: nurses' medication reconciliation role involves chasing, checking and educating; burden of undertaking medication reconciliation at hospital discharge; team collaboration and communication in medication reconciliation.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses had a minor role in medication reconciliation at hospital discharge due to a lack of organisation clinical practice guidance and specialised training. Standardising interprofessional medication reconciliation processes and increasing nurses' involvement will help to streamline this task, reduce discharge delays, workload pressure and improve patient safety.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Medication reconciliation at hospital discharge is an interprofessional patient safety activity, however little is known about nurse's role and responsibilities. This study reports nurses' important contribution to patient safety in terms of healthcare team coordination, medication checking and patient education. Supportive organisations and collaborative teams increased nurses' willingness to complete this activity.

[Medication Reconciliation during Admission to an Internal Medicine Department: The Perspective of Primary Health Care]

N/a.

Community pharmacists' attitudes towards, and experiences of, providing medication reviews after hospital discharge: a questionnaire survey

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the attitudes and experiences of community pharmacists providing medicines-use review (MUR) and post-discharge medicines-use review (PD-MUR) services.

METHODS

An online survey for community pharmacists who had experience providing the MUR service.

KEY FINDINGS

In total, 495 community pharmacists responded to the survey. A total of 89% (n = 382) of community pharmacists wanted to receive the patient's full discharge summary and 79% (n = 363) preferred electronic communication. Community pharmacists thought they could build trusted relationships with patients and felt that patients were willing to discuss post-discharge medicines-related issues with them. Less experienced pharmacists conducted more MURs than more experienced pharmacists (P = 0.004), and pharmacists working in large multiples (>50 pharmacies) conducted more MURs than those working in independent pharmacies (<5 pharmacies) (P = 0.001). Community pharmacists working in independent pharmacies conducted more PD-MURs than those working in large multiples (P = 0.004). Community pharmacists working in rural areas also thought they were best placed to provide PD-MURs while those working in urban areas thought that practice pharmacists were best suited to provide this service (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Community pharmacists believe they have a vital role in supporting patients after hospital discharge. They can build long-lasting, trusted relationships with patients and patients are willing to discuss medication issues with them. By providing community pharmacists in all locations with timely access to accurate discharge information, they could use their knowledge and skills to better support patients after hospital discharge.

[Medication Reconciliation During Admission to an Internal Medicine Department: A Pilot Study]

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of medication reconciliation is to promote patient safety by reducing medication errors and adverse events due to medication discrepancies in transition of care. The aim of this pilot study of medication reconciliation at the time of hospital admission was to identify the necessary resources for its implementation in clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Pilot study with 100 patients admitted to an Internal Medicine department between October and December 2019, aged 18 and over, and chronically taking at least one medicine. The best possible medication history was obtained systematically, with subsequent identification, classification and resolution of the discrepancies.

RESULTS

The study sample, in general characterized by polypharmacy and by having multiple long-term conditions, presented a mean age of 77.04 ± 13.74 years, being 67.0% male. Overall, 791 discrepancies were identified. Intentional discrepancies were 95.7% and 50.9% of them were documented. The difficulties encountered were mainly related with the access and quality of therapeutic information and communication problems between different healthcare professionals. The key priority resources that were identified were related with the process, tools, and personnel categories.

CONCLUSION

The data revealed weaknesses in the clinical records available at the primary/hospital care interface. Optimization of data sources, standardization and informatization of the process, multidisciplinary approach and definition of priority groups were identified as opportunities for optimization.

‘Everyone should know what they’re on’: a qualitative study of attitudes towards and use of patient held lists of medicines among patients, carers and healthcare professionals in primary and secondary care settings in Ireland

Objectives

Managing multiple medicines can be challenging for patients with multimorbidity, who are at high risk of adverse outcomes, for example, hospitalisation. Patient-held medication lists (PHMLs) can contribute to patient safety and potentially reduce medication errors. The aims of this study are to investigate attitudes towards and use of PHMLs among healthcare professionals (HCPs), patients and carers.

Design

Qualitative study based on 39 semistructured telephone interviews.

Setting

Primary and secondary care settings in Ireland.

Participants

Twenty-one HCPs and 18 people taking medicines and caregivers.

Methods

Telephone interviews were conducted with HCPs, people taking multiple medicines (5+ medicines) and carers of people taking medicines who were purposively sampled via social media, patient groups and research collaborators. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed based on the Framework approach, with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and Theoretical Domains Framework.

Results

Three core themes emerged: (1) attitudes to PHML, (2) function and preferred features of PHML and (3) barriers and facilitators to future use of PHML. All participating (patients/carers and HCP) groups considered PHML beneficial for patients and HCPs (eg, empowering for patients and improved adherence). While PHML were used in a variety of situations such as emergencies, concerns about their accuracy were shared across all groups. HCPs and patients differed on the level of detail that should be included in PHML. HCPs’ time constraints, patients’ multiple medicines and cognitive impairments were reported barriers. Key facilitators included access to digital/compact lists and promotion of lists by appropriate HCPs.

Conclusions

Our findings provide insight into the factors that influence use of PHML. Lists were used in a variety of settings, but there were concerns about their accuracy. A range of list formats and encouragement from key HCPs could increase the use of PHML.

Gabapentin initiation in the inpatient setting: A characterization of prescribing

Disclaimer

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

Purpose

Gabapentin is a widely prescribed analgesic with increased popularity over recent years. Previous studies have characterized use of gabapentin in the outpatient setting, but minimal data exist for its initiation in the inpatient setting. The objective of this study was to characterize the prescribing patterns of gabapentin when it was initiated in the inpatient setting.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of a random sample of adult patients who received new-start gabapentin during hospital admission. Patients for whom gabapentin was prescribed as a home medication, with one-time, on-call, or as-needed orders, or who died during hospital admission were excluded. The primary outcome was characterization of the gabapentin indication; secondary outcomes included the starting and discharge doses, the number of dose titrations, the rate of concomitant opioid prescribing, and pain clinic follow-up. Patients were stratified by surgical vs nonsurgical status.

Results

A total of 464 patients were included, 283 (61.0%) of whom were surgical and 181 (39.0%) of whom were nonsurgical. The cohort was 60% male with a mean (SD) age of 56 (18) years; surgical patients were younger and included more women. The most common indications for surgical patients were multimodal analgesia (161; 56.9%), postoperative pain (53; 18.7%), and neuropathic pain (26; 9.2%), while those for nonsurgical patients were neuropathic pain (72; 39.8%) and multimodal analgesia (53; 29.3%). The mean starting dose was similar between the subgroups (613 mg for surgical patients vs 560 mg for nonsurgical patients; P = 0.196). A total of 51.6% vs 81.8% of patients received gabapentin at discharge (P &lt; 0.0001), while referral/follow-up to a pain clinic was minimal and similar between the subgroups (1.1% vs 3.9%; P = 0.210).

Conclusion

Inpatients were commonly initiated on gabapentin for generalized indications, with approximately half discharged on gabapentin. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of this prescribing on chronic utilization.

Discharge summary medication list accuracy across five metropolitan hospitals: a retrospective medical record audit

ObjectiveTo determine the accuracy of discharge summary (DS) medication lists across a broad cross-section of hospital inpatients and to determine what factors may be associated with errors in this document.MethodsA retrospective medical record audit was undertaken at five metropolitan hospitals that utilise an electronic medication management system (eMMS) at the point of discharge. Four hospitals utilised an eMMS for inpatient medication management, with the fifth utilising the paper-based National Inpatient Medication Chart (NIMC). Any inpatients discharged during the first week of February, May, August and November 2020 and February 2021 were included if they received both a DS and either a pharmacy-generated patient-friendly medication list or interim medication administration chart.ResultsEight-hundred and one DSs were included, of which 525 (66%) had one or more medication errors and 220 (27%) had one or more high-risk medication errors. A higher proportion of patients with polypharmacy (five or more medications) had one or more errors compared to patients without polypharmacy (67% vs 54%, P < 0.01). DSs generated from the site with paper NIMCs were less likely to have one or more errors when compared to sites using an inpatient eMMS (58% vs 68%, P < 0.01). Age, sex, language spoken and preparing the DS post-discharge were not associated with differing rates of errors. Of the 2609 individual medication errors (390 high-risk errors), the most common types were 'omitted drug or dose' (34%) and 'unnecessary drug' (33%).ConclusionMedication errors in the DS are common and more likely to occur in patients with polypharmacy.

Study protocol for the evaluation of pharmacist-participated medication reconciliation at county hospitals in China: a multicentre, open-label, assessor-blinded, non-randomised, controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacist-participated medication reconciliation proved an effective strategy to decrease the risk of medication discrepancy-related errors. However, it is still under pilot in China and its effectiveness in the Chinese healthcare system remains unclear. This study aims to conduct a pharmacist-participated medication reconciliation intervention for elderly patients in county hospitals in China and to evaluate its effect.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre, prospective, open-label, assessor-blinded, cluster, non-randomised, controlled study for elderly patients. The study will be conducted in seven county hospitals, and the clusters will be hospital wards. In each hospital, two internal medicine wards will be randomly allocated into either intervention group or control group. Patients in the intervention group will receive pharmacist-participated medication reconciliation, and those in the control group will receive standard care. The primary outcome is the incidence of medication discrepancy, and the secondary outcomes are patients' medication adherence, healthcare utilisation and medical costs within 30 days after discharge.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics committee approval of this study was obtained from Peking University Institution Review Board (IRB00001052-21016). We have also obtained ethical approvals from all the participating centres. The findings will be published in scientific and conference presentations.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100045668.

Inpatient pharmacists using a readmission risk model in supporting discharge medication reconciliation to reduce unplanned hospital readmissions: a quality improvement intervention

Introduction

Reducing unplanned hospital readmissions is an important priority for all hospitals and health systems. Hospital discharge can be complicated by discrepancies in the medication reconciliation and/or prescribing processes. Clinical pharmacist involvement in the medication reconciliation process at discharge can help prevent these discrepancies and possibly reduce unplanned hospital readmissions.

Methods

We report the results of our quality improvement intervention at Duke University Hospital, in which pharmacists were involved in the discharge medication reconciliation process on select high-risk general medicine patients over 2 years (2018–2020). Pharmacists performed traditional discharge medication reconciliation which included a review of medications for clinical appropriateness and affordability. A total of 1569 patients were identified as high risk for hospital readmission using the Epic readmission risk model and had a clinical pharmacist review the discharge medication reconciliation.

Results

This intervention was associated with a significantly lower 7-day readmission rate in patients who scored high risk for readmission and received pharmacist support in discharge medication reconciliation versus those patients who did not receive pharmacist support (5.8% vs 7.6%). There was no effect on readmission rates of 14 or 30 days. The clinical pharmacists had at least one intervention on 67% of patients reviewed and averaged 1.75 interventions per patient.

Conclusion

This quality improvement study showed that having clinical pharmacists intervene in the discharge medication reconciliation process in patients identified as high risk for readmission is associated with lower unplanned readmission rates at 7 days. The interventions by pharmacists were significant and well received by ordering providers. This study highlights the important role of a clinical pharmacist in the discharge medication reconciliation process.

Medicines Reconciliation in the Emergency Department: Important Prescribing Discrepancies between the Shared Medication Record and Patients’ Actual Use of Medication

Medication reconciliation is crucial to prevent medication errors. In Denmark, primary and secondary care physicians can prescribe medication in the same electronic prescribing system known as the Shared Medication Record (SMR). However, the SMR is not always updated by physicians, which can lead to discrepancies between the SMR and patients’ actual use of medication. These discrepancies may compromise patient safety upon admission to the emergency department (ED). Here, we investigated (a) the occurrence of discrepancies, (b) factors associated with discrepancies, and (c) the percentage of patients accessible to a clinical pharmacist during pharmacy working hours. The study included all patients age ≥ 18 years who were admitted to the Hvidovre Hospital ED on three consecutive days in June 2020. The clinical pharmacists performed medicines reconciliation to identify prescribing discrepancies. In total, 100 patients (52% male; median age 66.5 years) were included. The patients had a median of 10 [IQR 7–13] medications listed in the SMR and a median of two [IQR 1–3.25] discrepancies. Factors associated with increased rate of prescribing discrepancies were age < 65 years, time since last update of the SMR ≥ 115 days, and patients’ self-dispensing their medications. Eighty-four percent of patients were available for medicines reconciliations during the normal working hours of the clinical pharmacist. In conclusion, we found that discrepancies between the SMR and patients’ actual medication use upon admission to the ED are frequent, and we identified several risk factors associated with the increased rate of discrepancies.

Implementation of a shared medication list in primary care - a controlled pre-post study of medication discrepancies

Background

Access to medicines information is important when treating patients, yet discrepancies in medication records are common. Many countries are developing shared medication lists across health care providers. These systems can improve information sharing, but little is known about how they affect the need for medication reconciliation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether an electronically Shared Medication List (eSML) reduced discrepancies between medication lists in primary care.

Methods

In 2018, eSML was tested for patients in home care who received multidose drug dispensing (MDD) in Oslo, Norway. We followed this transition from the current paper-based medication list to an eSML. Medication lists from the GP, home care service and community pharmacy were compared 3 months before the implementation and 18 months after. MDD patients in a neighbouring district in Oslo served as a control group.

Results

One hundred eighty-nine patients were included (100 intervention; 89 control). Discrepancies were reduced from 389 to 122 (p <  0.001) in the intervention group, and from 521 to 503 in the control group (p = 0.734). After the implementation, the share of mutual prescription items increased from 77 to 94%. Missing prescriptions for psycholeptics, analgesics and dietary supplements was reduced the most.

Conclusions

The eSML greatly decreases discrepancies between the GP, home care and pharmacy medication lists, but does not eliminate the need for medication reconciliation.

Adverse drug events during transitions of care : Randomized clinical trial of medication reconciliation at hospital admission

BACKGROUND

During transitions of care, patient's medications are prone to medication errors. This study evaluated the impact of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation at hospital admission on unintentional medication discrepancies and adverse drug events.

METHODS

A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted in 120 adult medical patients hospitalized in a tertiary hospital in Slovenia. In the intervention group, a pharmacist-led medication reconciliation was performed on admission, while the control group received usual care. Patient's drug treatment before admission was compared with their admission and inpatient treatment to identify discrepancies. The intention of discrepancies and related adverse drug events were assessed as a consensus of an expert panel.

RESULTS

Included patients were elderly (median 72 years) and treated with polypharmacy (median 7 medications). Upon admission, discrepancies and unintentional discrepancies, representing a medication error, were identified in 61.2% (825/1347) and 18.3% (247/1347) of medications, respectively. In the intervention group, only 29.1% (37/127) of unintentional discrepancies were reported to the physicians in person. The majority of admission discrepancies (88%) persisted through hospitalization. Unintentional discrepancies resulted in 51 adverse drug events even during hospitalization. There were no differences between the intervention and control group in the occurrence of unintentional discrepancies (p = 0.481) or adverse drug events (p = 0.801).

CONCLUSIONS

Medication reconciliation at hospital admission failed to reduce unintentional discrepancies and adverse drug events, possibly due to its poor integration into clinical practice. Discrepancies resulted in patient harm even during the short period of hospitalization, which warrants the implementation of medication reconciliation at hospital admission.

Evaluation of Pharmacist Renal Dose Adjustments and Planning for Future Evaluations of Pharmacist Services

Background: Clinical pharmacy services are known to improve patient outcomes. Pharmacists contribute to patient care in the acute care setting in multiple ways, including providing advice and information to patients and the health care team, performing medication histories to prevent waste and support medication adherence, analyzing the cost-effectiveness of medications, and ensuring patient safety through patient monitoring and medication review. Specific clinical pharmacist services include managing intravenous to oral medication adjustments, renal dose adjustments, and performing pharmacokinetic dosing of medications, among others. Many of these clinical services are performed daily but are not evaluated for clinical quality or compliance with policies. Evaluating these clinical services may provide a multitude of benefits to pharmacy departments, health systems, and patients. Methods: The purpose of this study was to evaluate pharmacist use and percent compliance of a renal dose adjustment policy upon initial order verification and discharge. This was completed through retrospective chart review to determine if dose adjustments were made appropriately and descriptive statistics were used to establish pharmacist compliance. Those orders that were inappropriately adjusted were analyzed for trends that could lead to possible policy improvements or pharmacist education opportunities. The completed evaluation also led to the development of an evaluation system that can be utilized to routinely assess clinical pharmacist services. Conclusions: The results of this study are being used to develop and support future clinical service evaluations, inspire process improvements, and improve patient outcomes and pharmacist accountability.

Impact of a medication reconciliation care bundle at hospital discharge on continuity of care: A randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of a care bundle including medication reconciliation at discharge by a pharmacist versus standard of care, on continuity of therapeutic changes between hospital and primary care and outcome of patients, within 1 month after discharge.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trial in 120 adult patients with at least one chronic disease and three current medications before admission, hospitalised in an infectious disease department of a tertiary hospital and discharged home. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a discharge care bundle including medication reconciliation, counselling session and documentation transfer to primary care physician (PCP) (intervention group) or standard of care (control group). Primary outcome was the proportion of in-hospital prescription changes, not maintained by the PCP, 1 month after discharge. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients experiencing early PCP's consultation, hospital readmissions or adverse reactions within 1-month postdischarge and cost of discharge prescriptions.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. One month after discharge, the proportion of in-hospital prescription changes, not maintained by the PCP, was 11% in the intervention group versus 24% in the control group (P = .007). The median delay before PCP's consultation was longer in the intervention group (30.5 vs 19.5 days, P = .013), there were fewer patients readmitted to hospital (3.4% vs 20.7%, P = .009, odds ratio (OR) = 0.13 [0.02-0.53]) and fewer patients who suffered from adverse drug reaction (7.0% vs 22.8%, P = .04, OR = 0.26 [0.07-0.78]).

CONCLUSION

This care bundle resulted in the reduction of treatment changes between hospital discharge and primary care.

Prevalence and Nature of Medication Errors and Medication-Related Harm Following Discharge from Hospital to Community Settings: A Systematic Review

Background

Little is known about the epidemiology of medication errors and medication-related harm following transition from secondary to primary care. This systematic review aims to identify and critically evaluate the available evidence on the prevalence and nature of medication errors and medication-related harm following hospital discharge.

Methods

Studies published between January 1990 and March 2019 were searched across ten electronic databases and the grey literature. No restrictions were applied with publication language or patient population studied. Studies were included if they contained data concerning the rate of medication errors, unintentional medication discrepancies, or adverse drug events. Two authors independently extracted study data.

Results

Fifty-four studies were included, most of which were rated as moderate (39/54) or high (7/54) quality. For adult patients, the median rate of medication errors and unintentional medication discrepancies following discharge was 53% [interquartile range 33–60.5] (n = 5 studies) and 50% [interquartile range 39–76] (n = 11), respectively. Five studies reported adverse drug reaction rates with a median of 27% [interquartile range 18–40.5] and seven studies reported adverse drug event rates with a median of 19% [interquartile range 16–24]. For paediatric patients, one study reported a medication error rate of 66.3% and another an adverse drug event rate of 9%. Almost a quarter of studies (13/54, 24%) utilised a follow-up period post-discharge of 1 month (range 2–180 days). Drug classes most commonly implicated with adverse drug events were antibiotics, antidiabetics, analgesics and cardiovascular drugs.

Conclusions

This is the first systematic review to explore the prevalence and nature of medication errors and adverse drug events following hospital discharge. Targets for future work have been identified.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40264-020-00918-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Impact of Adding Pharmacists and Comprehensive Medication Management to a Medical Group's Transition of Care Services

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the impact of pharmacist-provided transition of care (TOC) services on hospital readmissions.

METHODS

Starting March 2014, TOC services were provided to all hospitalized patients from an at-risk medical group. Data covering all inpatient and outpatient services and prescription drugs were retrieved for all adult patients discharged between January 2010 and December 2018. The overall impact of TOC was estimated using a generalized estimating equation with logistic regression. Longitudinal TOC effects were estimated using generalized estimating equation in an interrupted time series model. Parallel analyses were conducted using data from an affiliated medical group in a neighboring county without access to the TOC intervention.

RESULTS

The study included 13,256 hospital discharges for adult patients for the 30-day readmission analysis and 10,740 discharges for the 180 days analysis. The TOC program reduced 30-day readmission risk by 34.9% [odds ratio (OR)=0.651 (range, 0.590-0.719)] and 180-day readmissions by 33.4% [OR=0.666 (range, 0.604-0.735)]. The interrupted time series results found the 30-day readmission rate to be stable over the pre-TOC period (OR=0.00; not significant) then to decreased by 1.5% per month in the post-TOC period [OR=0.985 (range, 0.980-0.991)]. For 180-day readmissions, risk decreased by 1% per month after TOC implementation [OR=0.990 (range, 0.984-0.996)]. Referral to the medical group's pre-existing Priority Care clinic also reduced readmission risk. Results from the comparison medical group found 180-day readmission declined by 1% per month after March 2014 [OR=0.990 (0.891-1.00)].

CONCLUSIONS

Adding a pharmacist-led TOC program to the medical group's existing outpatient services reduced 30- and 180-day readmissions by "bending the curve" for readmission risk over time.

Medication-related experiences of patients with polypharmacy: a systematic review of qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

We aimed to synthesise qualitative studies exploring medication-related experiences of polypharmacy among patients with multimorbidity.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature in February 2020 for primary, peer-reviewed qualitative studies about multimorbid patients' medication-related experiences with polypharmacy, defined as the use of four or more medications. Identified studies were appraised for methodological quality by applying the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative research, and data were extracted and synthesised by the meta-aggregation approach.

RESULTS

We included 13 qualitative studies, representing 499 patients with polypharmacy and a wide range of chronic conditions. Overall, most Critical Appraisal Skills Programme items were reported in the studies. We extracted 140 findings, synthesised these into 17 categories, and developed five interrelated syntheses: (1) patients with polypharmacy are a heterogeneous group in terms of needing and appraising medication information; (2) patients are aware of the importance of medication adherence, but it is difficult to achieve; (3) decision-making about medications is complex; (4) multiple relational factors affect communication between patients and physicians, and these factors can prevent patients from disclosing important information; and (5) polypharmacy affects patients' lives and self-perception, and challenges with polypharmacy are not limited to practical issues of medication-taking.

DISCUSSION

Polypharmacy poses many challenges to patients, which have a negative impact on quality of life and adherence. Thus, when dealing with polypharmacy patients, it is crucial that healthcare professionals actively solicit individual patients' perspectives on challenges related to polypharmacy. Based on the reported experiences, we recommend that healthcare professionals upscale communicative efforts and involve patients' social network on an individualised basis to facilitate shared decision-making and treatment adherence in multimorbidpatients with polypharmacy.

Evaluation of a Novel Audit Tool for Medication Reconciliation at Hospital Discharge

BACKGROUND

Discharge medication reconciliation (MedRec) is designed to reduce medication errors and inform patients and key postdischarge providers, but it has been difficult to implement routinely in Canadian hospitals.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and optimize a new discharge MedRec quality audit tool and to use it at 3 urban teaching hospitals.

METHODS

The discharge MedRec quality audit tool, developed by the Canadian Patient Safety Institute and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada, was assessed and modified to improve comprehensiveness, clarity, and quality. The modified tool was then used to evaluate the quality of the discharge MedRec process for adult patients discharged to home from the general internal medicine service at 3 academic hospitals. Postdischarge telephone interviews were conducted with consenting patients, their community pharmacists, and their family doctors.

RESULTS

The audit tool required modification to include aspects of admission MedRec, high-risk medication discrepancies, and direct communication of discharge MedRec to key follow-up providers. Thirty-five patients (mean age 67.7 years, standard deviation [SD] 18.0 years; 17 [49%] women), with a mean of 8.8 (SD 4.5) prescribed medications at discharge, participated in the discharge MedRec evaluation. Documentation of any discharge MedRec was found for only 1 patient (3%), and no discharge MedRec was carried out by pharmacists. Postdischarge follow-up interviews elicited major gaps in communication with community pharmacists and with family physicians, which could lead to serious medication errors.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified audit tool was useful for identifying gaps in the quality of discharge MedRec.

Effect of an Electronic Medication Reconciliation Intervention on Adverse Drug Events: A Cluster Randomized Trial

IMPORTANCE

Adverse drug events (ADEs) account for up to 16% of emergency department (ED) visits and 7% of hospital admissions. Medication reconciliation is required for hospital accreditation because it can reduce medication discrepancies, but there is no evidence that reducing discrepancies reduces ADEs or other adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether electronic medication reconciliation reduces ADEs, medication discrepancies, and other adverse outcomes compared with usual care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cluster randomized trial involved 3491 patients who were discharged from 2 medical units and 2 surgical units at the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, between October 2014 and November 2016. Data analysis took place from July 2017 to July 2019.

INTERVENTION

The RightRx intervention electronically retrieved community drugs from the provincial insurer and aligned them with in-hospital drugs to facilitate reconciliation and communication at care transitions.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was ADEs in 30 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included medication discrepancies, ED visits, hospital readmissions, and a composite outcome of ED visits, readmissions, and death up to 90 days after discharge.

RESULTS

Of 4656 eligible patients, 3567 (76.6%) consented to participate (2060 [57.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 69.8 [14.9] years). Overall, 76 patients died during the hospital stay, so 3491 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the risk of ADEs between intervention and control groups (76 [4.6%] vs 73 [4.0%]; OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.33-1.48), ED visits (433 [26.2%] vs 488 [26.6%]; OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.36-1.42), hospital readmission (170 [10.3%] vs 261 [14.2%]; OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.06-1.14), or the composite outcome (447 [27.0%] vs 506 [27.6%]; OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.34-1.27) at 30 days. Medication discrepancies were significantly reduced in the intervention group compared with the control group (437 [26.4%] vs 1029 [56.0%]; OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.12-0.57). Changes made to community medications (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10) and new medications (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18) were significant risk factors for ADEs.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Electronic medication reconciliation reduced medication discrepancies but did not reduce ADEs or other adverse outcomes. Hospital accreditation should focus on interventions that reduce the risk of adverse events for patients with multiple changes to community medications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01179867.

Effectiveness of a pharmacist-led quality improvement program to reduce medication errors during hospital discharge

Background:

Patients requiring medications during discharge are at risk of discharge medication errors that potentially cause readmission due to medication-related events.

Objective:

The objective of this study was to develop interventions to reduce percentage of patients with one or more medication errors during discharge.

Methods:

A pharmacist-led quality improvement (QI) program over 6 months was conducted in medical wards at a tertiary public hospital. Percentage of patients discharge with one or more medication errors was reviewed in the pre-intervention and four main improvements were developed: increase the ratio of pharmacist to patient, prioritize discharge prescription order within office hours, complete discharge medication reconciliation by ward pharmacist, set up a Centralized Discharge Medication Pre-packing Unit. Percentage of patients with one or more medication errors in both pre- and post-intervention phase were monitored using process control chart.

Results:

With the implementation of the QI program, the percentage of patients with one or more medication errors during discharge that were corrected by pharmacists significantly increased from 77.6% to 95.9% (p<0.001). Percentage of patients with one or more clinically significant error was similar in both pre and post-QI with an average of 24.8%.

Conclusions:

Increasing ratio of pharmacist to patient to complete discharge medication reconciliation during discharge significantly recorded a reduction in the percentage of patients with one or more medication errors.

Medication errors in primary health care records; a cross-sectional study in Southern Sweden

Background

Drug-related problems due to medication errors are common and have the potential to cause harm. This study, which was conducted in Swedish primary health care, aimed to assess how well the medication lists in the medical records tally with the medications used by patients and to explore what type of medication errors are present.

Methods

We reviewed the electronic medical records (EMRs) at ten primary health care centers in Skåne county, Sweden. The medication lists in the EMRs were compared with the results of medication reconciliations, which were performed telephonically in a structured manner by a physician, two weeks after a follow-up visit to a general practitioner. Of 76 patients aged ≥18 years, who on a certain day in 2016 were visiting one of the included primary health care centers, a total of 56 were included. Descriptive statistics were used. The chi2-test and the Mann Whitney U-test were used for comparisons. The main outcome measure was the proportion of correctly updated medication lists.

Results

Following a recent visit to the general practitioner, a total of 16% of the medication lists in the medical records were consistent with the patients’ actual medication use. The mean number of medication errors in the medical records was 3.8 (SD 3.8). Incorrect dose was the most common error, followed by additional drugs without indication/documentation. The most common medication group among all errors was analgesics and among dose errors the most common medication group was cardiovascular drugs.

Conclusion

A total of 84% of the medication lists used by the general practitioners in the assessment and follow-up of the patients were not updated; this implies a great safety risk since medication errors are potentially harmful. Ensuring medication reconciliations in daily clinical practice is important for patient safety.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-1001-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Frequency of undocumented medication discrepancies in discharge letters after hospitalization of older patients: a clinical record review study

Transitions of care may result in medication errors, when information about a patient’s medications is not communicated sufficiently. In this clinical record review study, we aimed to evaluate the frequency of undocumented medication discrepancies at discharge from hospital and evaluate which patient characteristics could be associated with undocumented medication discrepancies. Preadmission medication lists were compared against the medication list in the discharge letters, taking into account medication changes documented in the patient record throughout the inpatient stay and in the discharge summary. Out of 200 patients, 174 (87%) were affected by at least one undocumented medication discrepancy, mostly for regular medication. Of the 1972 medications used, 744 (38%) medications were changed without documentation in the patient record, the majority being over-the-counter supplements and herbal medications. Polypharmacy at admission and discharge was associated with increased undocumented medication discrepancies. This study indicates a lack of medication reconciliation during inpatient stay. Correct and complete medication lists at admission and discharge may resolve many of these discrepancies, supporting patient safety at transitions of care.

Assessing the knowledge, perception and practices of physicians and pharmacists towards medication reconciliation in Kuwait governmental hospitals: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the knowledge, perception and practices towards medication reconciliation (MedRec) and its related institutional policies among physicians and pharmacists in governmental hospitals in Kuwait and identifying potential obstacles that prevent the successful implementation of MedRec.

DESIGN

A descriptive, cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Six governmental hospitals across Kuwait in January-May 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

351 physicians and 214 pharmacists.

BRIEF INTERVENTION

A self-administered questionnaire distributed to the participants.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Knowledge, perception, attitudes and practices of hospital physicians and pharmacists towards MedRec, and major barriers to implementing a MedRec process in their institution/department.

RESULTS

Of the 739 questionnaires distributed, 565 were completed (351 physicians and 214 pharmacists), giving a response rate of 76.5%. Results showed that most participants were familiar with the term MedRec (n=419; 75.2%) with significantly more pharmacists compared with physicians (n=171; 81.8% vs n=248; 71.3%; p=0.005). Most participants (n=432; 80.0%) reported perceiving MedRec as a valuable process for patient safety. However, significantly more physicians compared with pharmacists were aware of a MedRec policy in their institution (n=195; 55.9% vs n=78; 37.9%; p<0.001) and routinely asked patients about their current list of medication on arrival (n=339; 96.6% vs n=129; 61.1%; p<0.001) and provided an updated list on discharge (n=281; 80.1% vs n=107; 52.0%; p<0.001). These results are supported by the findings that participants perceived physicians as providers, mainly responsible for various steps of MedRec.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this study showed low awareness among physicians and pharmacists of hospital policy despite MedRec being perceived as valuable. Physicians were the providers most responsible and involved in MedRec, who may be driven by the policy putting them at core of the process. The current findings could pave the way for the expansion of the existing MedRec policies and processes in Kuwait to include pharmacists and improve patient safety.

The Connected Community Pharmacy: Benefits for Healthcare and Implications for Health Policy

The need for interoperability of healthcare Information Technology (IT) systems in order to provide safe, efficient, and coordinated healthcare is universally recognized. Various health economies, such as the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia, are seeking to develop regional, state-wide, or national systems of healthcare interoperability. In England, the community pharmacy network is a significant health provider, with important implications for provision of healthcare in deprived areas because of its accessibility. Historically, however, community pharmacies have operated on a silo basis, and have not shared information on their activities with, or been able to access information from, other National Health Service (NHS) healthcare providers. The development of services such as the Electronic Prescription Service and the Summary Care Record in England have helped to connect community pharmacy with the NHS infrastructure, and more comprehensive systems and datasets are proposed to integrate community pharmacy with the NHS in future. This paper will review the benefits of the connected community pharmacy, based on developments to date and reviewing evidence from other countries. It will describe some of the future developments that will support the connected community pharmacy in England, and discuss some of the implications for pharmacists and health policy makers.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation in the community after hospital discharge

BACKGROUND

Pharmacists' completion of medication reconciliation in the community after hospital discharge is intended to reduce harm due to prescribed or omitted medication and increase healthcare efficiency, but the effectiveness of this approach is not clear. We systematically review the literature to evaluate intervention effectiveness in terms of discrepancy identification and resolution, clinical relevance of resolved discrepancies and healthcare utilisation, including readmission rates, emergency department attendance and primary care workload.

METHODS

This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of extracted data. Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED),Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Scopus, NHS Evidence and the Cochrane databases were searched using a combination of medical subject heading terms and free-text search terms. Controlled studies evaluating pharmacist-led medication reconciliation in the community after hospital discharge were included. Study quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Evidence was assessed through meta-analysis of readmission rates. Discrepancy identification rates, emergency department attendance and primary care workload were assessed narratively.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included, comprising five randomised controlled trials, six cohort studies and three pre-post intervention studies. Twelve studies had a moderate or high risk of bias. Increased identification and resolution of discrepancies was demonstrated in the four studies where this was evaluated. Reduction in clinically relevant discrepancies was reported in two studies. Meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant reduction in readmission rate. There was no consistent evidence of reduction in emergency department attendance or primary care workload.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists can identify and resolve discrepancies when completing medication reconciliation after hospital discharge, but patient outcome or care workload improvements were not consistently seen. Future research should examine the clinical relevance of discrepancies and potential benefits on reducing healthcare team workload.