Impact of a multidisciplinary medication reconciliation program on clinical outcomes: A pre-post intervention study in surgical patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have evaluated the effects of medication reconciliation (MR) and suggest that it is effective in decreasing medication discrepancies. Nevertheless, a recent overview of systematic reviews concluded that there is no clear evidence in favor of MR in patient-related outcomes and healthcare utilization, and further research about it is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a multidisciplinary MR program on clinical outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer presenting other chronic diseases, undergoing elective colorectal surgery. METHODS: We performed a pre-post study. Adult patients scheduled for elective colorectal cancer surgery were included if they presented at least one "high-risk" criteria. The MR program was developed by internists, pharmacists and surgeons, and ended with the obtention of the patient's pre-admission medication list and follow-up care until discharge. The primary outcome was the length of stay (LOS). Secondly, we evaluated mortality, preventable surgery cancellations and risk factors for complications. RESULTS: Three hundred and eight patients were enrolled. Only one patient in the pre-intervention group suffered a preventable surgery cancellation (p = 0.317). The mean LOS was 13 ± 12 vs. 11 ± 5 days in the pre-intervention and the intervention cohort, respectively (p = 0.435). A difference in favor of the intervention group in patients with cardiovascular disease (p = 0.038) and those >75 years old (p = 0.043) was observed. No difference was detected in the mortality rate (p = 0.999) neither most of the indicators of risk factors for complications. However, the management of preoperative systolic blood pressure of hypertensive patients (p = 0.004) and insulin reconciliation in patients with treated diabetes (p = 0.003) were statistically better in the intervention group. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant change was observed in the mean global LOS. A statistically significant positive effect on LOS was observed in vulnerable populations: patients >75 years old and those with cardiovascular disease, who presented a 5-day reduction in the mean LOS.

Impact of medication reconciliation on health outcomes: An overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses suggest that medication reconciliation (MR) is effective in decreasing the risk of medication discrepancies. Nevertheless, the association between MR and subsequent improved healthcare outcomes is not well established. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review of reviews set out to identify published systematic reviews on the impact of MR programs on health outcomes and to describe key components of the intervention, the health outcomes assessed and any associations between MR and health outcomes. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and SCOPUS were searched from inception to May 2019. Systematic reviews of all study designs, populations, intervention providers and settings that measured patient-related outcomes or healthcare utilization were considered. Methodological quality was assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2). Two investigators performed study selection, quality assessment and data collection independently. RESULTS: Five systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria: 2 were rated as low quality and 3 as critically low quality. Reviews included primary studies in different settings (hospitals, the community and residential aged care facilities) that reported the impact of MR on mortality, length of stay, Emergency Department (ED) visits, readmissions, physician visits and healthcare utilization. Only one review reported results on mortality. However, healthcare utilization, which usually included ED visits and readmissions, was communicated in all reviews. Meta-analyses were conducted in all reviews except one. Medication reconciliation was not consistently found to be associated with improvements in health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Few systematic reviews support the value of MR in achieving good patient-related outcomes and healthcare utilization improvements. The quality of the systematic reviews was low and the primary studies included commonly involved additional activities related to MR. There was no clear evidence in favor of intervention in mortality, length of stay, ED visits, unplanned readmissions, physician visits and healthcare utilization.