ArticleDeutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2020
[How complete is the Germany-wide standardised medication list ("Bundeseinheitlicher Medikationsplan")? An analysis at hospital admission.]
Article in Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health information management of older, multimorbid patients in German primary care: feasibility and first results of the outcome measures of a cluster-randomised controlled pilot trial - HYPERION-TransCare.BMC primary care · 2025Trial
- Enhancing Continuous Medication Safety Through e-Prescription and Clinical Decision Support Systems in Outpatient Practices and Pharmacies: Protocol for a Multiperspective Study (eRIKA Study).JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Evaluating the quality, feasibility and patient satisfaction of medication history taking by telephone for patients with scheduled admissions: a pilot study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Drugs Frequently Suspected of Causing Adverse Drug Reactions Reported via the Spontaneous Reporting System Versus in a Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study in Hospital Emergency Departments.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Continuity of medication information transfer and continuous medication supply during hospital-to-home transitions - nationwide surveys in hospital and community pharmacies after implementing new legal requirements in Germany.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Current Practices of Medication Plans in Austrian Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography: An In-Depth Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- [Scoring tool to identify patients at increased risk for drug-related problems: results of a point prevalence study at hospital admission].Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2023Article
- Patients' Use of a Standardized Medication List - A Mixed Methods Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAt inpatient admission, the timeliness and completeness of the Germany-wide standardised medication list ("Bundeseinheitlicher Medikationsplan") often seems inappropriate. It is also unclear which characteristics of the lists increase the probability of discrepancies.
methodsA total of 100 medication lists of elective patients of a surgical clinic were retrospectively evaluated with regard to potential discrepancies compared to the standardised medication reconciliation. The discprepancies were assigned to 7 categories: drug taken is missing on the list, drug on the list is no longer taken, strength or dosage is missing at the list or is incorrect, or the documented dosage form is different. Advice on patient safety, involved drugs and dosage forms were also recorded. Multivariate analyses were used to investigate the influence of the timeliness, number of drugs and issuing medical specialty of the lists on the type and number of discrepancies.
resultsCompared to the medication reconciliation, 78 % (78/100) of the lists showed discrepancies. A total of 226 deviations (2.3 ± 0.6 deviations/list) were documented. Most often, a drug was missing from the list (n = 103). Of all recommendations, 64 % (83/177) concerned the perioperative management of anticoagulants (n = 55) and antidiabetics (n = 28), corresponding to 62 % (62/100) of the lists. In the multivariate analysis, only the risk of incorrect information on strength and dosage increased significantly with the age of the lists (p = 0.047) and was more than twice as high when the list was more than one month old.
conclusionsThe timeliness, completeness and aspects of patient safety must be comprehensively validated. Medication lists that are older than 1 month should be checked particularly critically with regard to information on strength and dosage and the plan should be updated accordingly at regular intervals.
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.