Background: Medication therapy management (MTM) services is a method that can effectively improve patients’ conditions, but the efficacy of economic and humanistic outcomes remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to use economic, clinical and humanistic outcomes to evaluate the multi-benefits of MTM services.Method: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by retrieving PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrial.gov from the inception to April 2022. There were two reviewers screening the records, extracting the data, and assessing the quality of studies independently.Results: A total of 81 studies with 60,753 participants were included. MTM services were more effective in clinical outcomes with decreasing the rate of readmission (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.83; I2 = 56%), emergency department visit (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.96; I2 = 32%), adverse drug events (All-cause: OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.84; I2 = 61%; SAE: OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.79; I2 = 35%) and drug-related problems (MD: −1.37; 95% CI: −2.24 to −0.5; I2 = 95%), reducing the length of stay in hospital (MD: −0.74; 95% CI: −1.37 to −0.13; I2 = 70%), while the economic and humanistic outcomes were less effective.Conclusion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that MTM services had great ability to improve patients’ clinical conditions while the efficacy of economic and humanistic outcomes, with some of the outcomes showing high degree of heterogeneity and possible publication bias, required more future studies to provide stronger evidence.Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=349050], identifier [CRD42022349050].

Background: Medication therapy management (MTM) service is an effective method to reduce medication-related problems and improve patients’ multiple kinds of outcomes. However, the lack of comprehensive review for MTM services has hindered its development. As a result, we are aiming to evaluate the current benefits of MTM services with multiple outcomes. Method: An electronic search will be performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or non-randomized control trials (NRCTs) that reported MTM services or pharmaceutical services as interventions from PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and ClinicalTrial. gov. The odds ratios, mean differences, and standard mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals (95% confidence intervals) will be calculated with fixed or random effect models. Results: This study will evaluate the multiple benefits of MTM services in clinical endpoints, quality of life, economy, and drug-related problems. Conclusion: The results will review eligible studies released in the past twenty years and provide more comprehensive evidence of the efficacy of MTM services. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not applicable for this study.