Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27549581›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2016

Impact of electronic medication reconciliation interventions on medication discrepancies at hospital transitions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alemayehu B Mekonnen, Tamrat B Abebe, Andrew J McLachlan, Jo-Anne E Brien

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Effect of medication reconciliation interventions on outcomes: A systematic overview of systematic reviews.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Electronic medication reconciliation in hospitals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2018
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Why is it so hard to reduce harm from medicines?Future healthcare journal · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alemayehu B MekonnenFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. aber5592@uni.sydney.edu.au.
Tamrat B AbebeSchool of Pharmacy, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Andrew J McLachlanFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Jo-Anne E BrienFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Concord Repatriation General Hospital · AUSt Vincent's Hospital · AUUniversity of Gondar · ETUniversity of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication reconciliation has been identified as an important intervention to minimize the incidence of unintentional medication discrepancies at transitions in care. However, there is a lack of evidence for the impact of information technology on the rate and incidence of medication discrepancies identified during care transitions. This systematic review was thus, aimed to evaluate the impact of electronic medication reconciliation interventions on the occurrence of medication discrepancies at hospital transitions.

methodsSystematic literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, CINHAL, and EMBASE from inception to November, 2015. We included published studies in English that evaluated the effect of information technology on the incidence and rate of medication discrepancies compared with usual care. Cochrane's tools were used for assessment of the quality of included studies. We performed meta-analyses using random-effects models.

resultsTen studies met our inclusion criteria; of which only one was a randomized controlled trial. Interventions were carried out at various hospital transitions (admission, 5; discharge, 2 and multiple transitions, 3 studies). Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of 45 % in the proportion of medications with unintentional discrepancies after the use of electronic medication reconciliation (RR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.51 to 0.58). However, there was no significant reduction in either the proportion of patients with medication discrepancies or the mean number of discrepancies per patient. Drug omissions were the most common types of unintended discrepancies, and with an electronic tool a significant but heterogeneously distributed reduction of omission errors over the total number of medications reconciled have been observed (RR 0.20; 95 % CI 0.06 to 0.66). The clinical impact of unintended discrepancies was evaluated in five studies, and there was no potentially fatal error identified and most errors were minor in severity.

conclusionMedication reconciliation supported by an electronic tool was able to minimize the incidence of medications with unintended discrepancy, mainly drug omissions. But, this did not consistently reduce other process outcomes, although there was a lack of rigorous design to conform these results.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHumansMedication ReconciliationTransitional CareCare transitionElectronic medication reconciliationMedication discrepanciesMedication errorsMedication historyMedication safety

Identifiers

PMID27549581
PMCPMC4994239
OpenAlexW2512846044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.