Trial reportPloS one2025
Impacts of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on discrepancies and 30-days post-discharge health services utilization in elderly Jordanians.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of Clinical Pharmacy Residents on Medication Reconciliation upon Admission in a Tertiary Care Hospital.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the impacts of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation (MedRec) on medication discrepancies and post-discharge health services utilization in elderly patients in Jordan. And to identify predictors of post discharge outcomes.
methodNewly admitted patients, aged above 65 years were randomly allocated into either a group receiving pharmacist led MedRec or standard care. Within 24 hours of admission, a clinical pharmacist compiled a list of the Best Possible Medication History (BPMH) using at least two sources of information. The pharmacist compared the BPMHs to the admission charts to identify discrepancies and resolved them accordingly. One month post-discharge, patients were assessed for health services use, namely hospital readmissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and adverse drug events (ADEs). Logistic regressions used to investigate predictors of post discharge outcomes.
resultsA total of 128 patients with 151 medication discrepancies were included: 82 (54.3%) discrepancies in the intervention group, and 69 (45.7%) in the control group. A total of 52 Pharmacist-led interventions were recommended to physicians, of which 49 (94.2%) were accepted/implemented. At discharge, the majority of unintentional discrepancies were successfully resolved (p < 0.001). At 30 days post-discharge, patients who were readmitted to the hospital and visited the ED were significantly from the control group. There was no significant difference with respect to experiencing ADEs among the study groups. Patients who received pharmacist-led MedRec had almost 70% lower likelihood of hospital readmission and ED visits. Discrepancies at discharge was associated with higher odds of hospital readmissions.
conclusionPharmacist-led MedRec services improved continuity of care for elderly patients. Implementing a structured reconciliation process successfully resolved discrepancies and reduced hospital readmissions as well as ED visits at 30-days post-discharge. This outlines potentials for healthcare cost savings. Future studies are recommended to explore long-term benefits, cost-effectiveness, and integrating pharmacist-led MedRec into standard discharge planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.