ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2020
Evaluation of Bedside Delivery of Medications Before Discharge: Effect on 30-Day Readmission.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Bedside Medication Delivery in Reducing Hospital Readmissions: A Quality Improvement Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Provision of medication supply at hospital discharge: A rapid scoping review of the "Meds-to-Beds" care model.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study is an evaluation of a discharge intervention that occurred in multiple hospitals across Maryland. In this program, patients received medications at their bedside before discharge with the goal of reducing the risk of primary nonadherence to prescribed medications.
objectiveTo test if the intervention reduced the risk of 30-day readmission for the patients who received bedside medication delivery relative to comparable patients who did not receive bedside medication delivery.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study. Patients who received the intervention were linked to their claims data in the Maryland Health Information Exchange. These patients were matched on age, sex, diagnosis-related group, and hospital to a set of patients who did not receive the intervention. We used propensity score matching, as well as inverse-probability weighting, to account for residual differences between the treated and comparison patients. With robust Poisson regression, adjusting for hospital, we generated risk ratios for 30-day readmission and explored risk ratios in key subgroups.
resultsThe cohort included 6,167 inpatients who received medications at bedside and 28,546 who did not from 10 Maryland hospitals. They were 60% female, 61% white, and 31% African American; the average age was 56 years. The risk ratio for readmission, comparing the intervention group to the propensity score-matched comparison group, was 1.21 (95% CI = 0.96-1.5). Inverse-probability weighting yielded a similar result (1.19 [95% CI = 0.98-1.45]).
conclusionsIn this study, the isolated intervention of bedside medication delivery did not reduce 30-day readmission risk. We expect it may have favorable outcomes on other metrics such as primary nonadherence and patient satisfaction. It may also have a favorable effect when bundled with other care transition activities. As an isolated intervention, however, bedside medication delivery is unlikely to affect 30-day readmission rates. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Walgreen Co. through unrestricted funds to Johns Hopkins University, which has received fees from Walgreens for providing consultation as an institution to Walgreens. This arrangement has been reviewed and approved by the Johns Hopkins University in accordance with its conflict of interest policies. Segal received a grant from the National Institute on Aging during the conduct of this study. The other authors have nothing to disclose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.