{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015873015873015872, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.855072463768116, '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}}
Antifungal stewardship in daily practice and health economic implications

During recent years, inappropriate antifungal use has contributed to the global increase in antifungal resistance and has played a role in the shift in the aetiology of invasive fungal infections. Moreover, overuse of antifungals may also lead to higher toxicity associated with unnecessary medication exposure and to increased healthcare costs. Antifungal stewardship (AFS) programmes consist of multidisciplinary interventions, led by specialists in infectious disease, microbiology and pharmacy that cooperate and communicate with the major prescribing departments in order to optimise antifungal therapies evaluating the indication, dose, streamlining and duration. Herein, we review the available evidence for the use of AFS and their impact on health economics. We also describe our AFS program, the successive steps we followed and the main difficulties we found.