ArticleMicroorganisms2026
Bridging the Gap Between Strategy and Implementation in Antimicrobial Stewardship: Insights from the ARCO Step II Interregional Delphi Consensus in Northeastern Italy.
Article in Microorganisms, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
National and international frameworks provide strategic direction for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS), while their translation into operational practice remains inconsistent. Building on ARCO Step I findings, this study aimed to establish an interregional, multidisciplinary consensus on sustainable AMS implementation strategies across hospital and community settings in Northeastern Italy. A modified Delphi methodology engaged 33 interdisciplinary professionals from Northeastern Italy. Eighteen operational statements across three domains (Governance, Hospital AMS, Community AMS) underwent two quantitative scoring rounds (relevance and feasibility; 1-10 scale) separated by a structured in-person workshop with thematic round-table discussions. Consensus threshold was defined as median score ≥ 8.0; high-priority statements required combined score ≥ 8.5. All 18 statements achieved consensus for relevance, whereas 12 statements achieved consensus for feasibility. Post-discussion median scores feasibility showed a numerically larger increase for feasibility (Δ +0.78) compared to relevance (Δ +0.44), indicating that structured deliberation reduced perceived implementation barriers. Furthermore, 14 statements were classified as high-priority. Qualitative analysis identified key enablers (CEO performance mandates, multidisciplinary teams, standardized indicators) and barriers (digital infrastructure gaps, resource constraints). The participatory approach helped translate strategic policy into a set of practice-oriented recommendations, offering a potentially transferable model for regional health authorities implementing AMR action plans, pending evaluation of actual implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.