Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Importance of medication reconciliation, even in the absence of positive data
  1. Laura Hellemans1,2,
  2. Julie Hias1,2,
  3. Sabrina De Winter1,
  4. Karolien Walgraeve1,
  5. Jos Tournoy3,4,
  6. Lorenz Roger Van der Linden1,2
  1. 1 Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
  2. 2 Hospital Pharmacy Department, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
  3. 3 Department of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Flemish Brabant, Belgium
  4. 4 Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Flanders, Belgium
  1. Correspondence to Dr Lorenz Roger Van der Linden, Hospital Pharmacy Department, KU Leuven University Hospitals Leuven Gasthuisberg Campus Hospital Pharmacy, 3000 Leuven, Flanders, Belgium; lorenz.vanderlinden{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Good clinical practice dictates that medication reconciliation should be performed regularly and during care transitions. Recently, Ceschi et al reported the findings of their well-executed randomised controlled trial (RCT).1 They undertook a medication reconciliation in patients at risk for medication-related harm and subsequent medication-related hospitals admissions, if they were at least 85 years old and/or if they used >10 medications. No positive impact on any of the clinical outcomes was found. Subsequently, the underlying assumption, that reducing unintentional discrepancies might reduce medication-related harm, remains largely unproven.

The medication reconciliation intervention performed by Ceschi et al did, however, uncover a very high number of discrepancies. At least one discrepancy was …

View Full Text


  • LH and JH are joint first authors.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.