ArticleHealth economics review2025
Economic evaluation of inpatient medication reconciliation with a subtraction strategy.
Article in Health economics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pulmonary hypertension in dialysis patients: clinical insights from tricuspid regurgitation velocity (TRV)-based echocardiographic criteria.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of atrial fibrillation in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a hospital-based cross-sectional study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Atrial Fibrillation in the Context of Thyrotoxicosis: Prevalence and Clinical Determinants.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUniversity-based hospitals in Thailand face increasing financial strain due to insufficient reimbursement for inpatient care. The public health financing system comprises three major schemes: the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS), Social Security Scheme (SSS), and Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), which differ in funding mechanisms and reimbursement rates. Although all schemes apply the Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG) system for inpatient payment, variations in base rates and case-mix complexity often leave tertiary hospitals underfunded. Medication reconciliation (MR) with a subtraction strategy-deducting patients' home medications from discharge prescriptions-has been implemented to optimize hospital resources. This study aimed to evaluate cost savings and identify key determinants influencing the economic outcomes of MR across public insurance schemes.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 563 hospitalized internal medicine patients at a university-based hospital. Of these, 324 underwent MR with subtraction. Cost savings and reimbursement margins were calculated from the provider's perspective. Patients were stratified by healthcare scheme (CSMBS, UCS, SSS) and length of stay (LOS). Generalized Linear Mixed Models were used to identify factors associated with cost savings.
resultsThe highest mean cost savings per patient were observed in the SSS group (508.5 ± 56.1 THB [~ 14.1 USD]), and the lowest in CSMBS (133.5 ± 23.6 THB [~ 3.7 USD]). Prolonged LOS was associated with significantly greater savings (LOS > 21 days: IRR = 2.45, p < 0.001). SSS patients achieved the greatest overall savings (IRR = 3.95, p < 0.001). Nonetheless, negative reimbursement margins persisted across all schemes.
conclusionsAlthough MR with subtraction achieved measurable cost savings, it failed to offset reimbursement deficits. Broader financial reforms are needed to ensure sustainability, with MR positioned as a potentially scalable strategy within value-based care frameworks.
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.