ArticleBMC medical education2025
Medication reconciliation in clinical practice: a survey of knowledge, attitude, and practices among Egyptian healthcare providers.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundPatients are at significant risk of harm from unintended medication errors, which remain prevalent and often preventable in healthcare systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Medication reconciliation (MedRec) plays a critical role in minimizing these errors by ensuring an accurate and complete medication list throughout patient transitions in the healthcare system.
aimThis study aimed to assess the current status of the MedRec process in Egypt by exploring the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of physicians and pharmacists as key stakeholders in its implementation.
methodsThis descriptive, cross-sectional study used a structured, validated, self-administered online questionnaire targeting Egyptian physicians and pharmacists. The questionnaire was distributed via snowball sampling through professional networks and social media. Branching logic was used to tailor questions based on respondents’ familiarity with MedRec and hospital-based practices. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the responses, while Chi-square and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to assess group differences.
resultsAmong 272 respondents (182 pharmacists, 90 physicians), representing multiple Egyptian governorates and healthcare sectors (public, private, and military). Among them, 66.9% reported familiarity with MedRec, significantly higher among pharmacists (73.1% vs. 54.4%; p = 0.002). Most respondents (70.2%) rated MedRec as “very valuable” for patient safety, and both groups expressed strong responsibility for its core tasks. Among the 136 hospital-based respondents familiar with MedRec, 79.4% reported institutional implementation. Physicians were more likely than pharmacists to ask patients for their current medication lists (93.8% vs. 76.1%; p = 0.021). Sources of medication history included patient lists or physician documents (74.3%), family interviews (74.3%), medication boxes from home (59.56%), discharge orders (52.2%), and transfer orders from other facilities (33.8%).
conclusionContinuous education and training programs are required to close knowledge gaps, strengthen MedRec practices, and promote a culture of patient safety in Egypt.
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.