{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010046885465505693, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010046885465505693, 'mean_word_length': 6.114285714285714, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Concise Set of Structure and Process Indicators to Assess and Compare Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs Among EU and US Hospitals: Results From a Multinational Expert Panel

OBJECTIVES To develop common indicators, relevant to both EU member states and the United States, that characterize and allow for meaningful comparison of antimicrobial stewardship programs among different countries and healthcare systems. DESIGN Modified Delphi process. PARTICIPANTS A multinational panel of 20 experts in antimicrobial stewardship. METHODS Potential indicators were rated on the perceived feasibility to implement and measure each indicator and clinical importance for optimizing appropriate antimicrobial prescribing. RESULTS The outcome was a set of 33 indicators developed to characterize the infrastructure and activities of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs. Among them 17 indicators were considered essential to characterize an antimicrobial stewardship program and therefore were included in a core set of indicators. The remaining 16 indicators were considered optional indicators and included in a supplemental set. CONCLUSIONS The integration of these indicators in public health surveillance and special studies will lead to a better understanding of best practices in antimicrobial stewardship. Additionally, future studies can explore the association of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs to antimicrobial use and resistance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016:1–11