Background: A Best Possible Medication History (BPMH) collected by clinical pharmacists is crucial for effective medication review, but, in Italy, it is often left to the nursing staff. This study aims to compare the quality and accuracy of a clinical pharmacist-documented BPMH with the current standard practice of ward staff-collected BPMH in an Italian preoperative surgical setting. Methods: A 20-week prospective observational non-profit study was conducted in a major university hospital. The study comprised three phases: a feasibility, an observational, and an interventional phase. During the feasibility phase, 10 items for obtaining a correct BPMH were identified. The control group consisted of retrospectively analyzed BPMHs collected by the ward staff during the observational phase, while interventions included BPMHs collected by the clinical pharmacist during the third phase. Omissions between the two groups were compared. Results: 14 (2.0%) omissions were found in the intervention group, compared with 400 (57.4%) found in the controls (p < 0.05); data collection was more complete when collected by pharmacists compared to the current modality (98.0% of completed information for the intervention versus 42.6%; p < 0.05). Conclusions: The involvement of a pharmacist significantly reduced the number of omissions in preoperative surgical-collected BPMHs. This intervention holds the potential to decrease the risk of medication errors associated with inaccurate or incomplete BPMHs prior to surgical hospitalization.

Background: Medication errors often stem from incomplete or incorrect transfer of drug information during reviews. To enhance medication review processes, a collaborative healthcare team, including a pharmacist in the surgical ward, is essential. This study aimed to identify the frequency and the kind of intentional and unintentional discrepancies related to the prescriptions within two surgical wards. Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted among adult patients admitted to two surgical settings. The patients were selected between May 30th and November 30th, 2021. The study followed a three-phase structure: patient selection, medication review to identify discrepancies and DRPs, and the detection of any such issues in the discharge letter. Results: The most frequent types of discrepancies collected were substitutions (60.9%) for the Endocrinological Surgery and omissions for General Surgery (53.4%). In Endocrinological Surgery, 45.9% of cases exhibited class C drug interactions. In General Surgery, class D drug interactions were predominantly observed (54.1%), with 93.3% attributed to drugs carrying an elevated risk of prolonging the QT interval. Conclusions: Frequently, the medication review process is superficially carried out, introducing errors that may adversely affect patient health. This study explores the potential positive impact of involving the clinical pharmacist in identifying and managing discrepancies and DRPs.