The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate psychometrically the Korean version of the Primary Care Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Screen for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-fifth edition (K-PC-PTSD-5). In total, 252 participants were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-fifth edition-research version (SCID-5-RV). The K-PC-PTSD-5 showed good internal consistency (α = 0.872), test-retest reliability (r = 0.89), and concurrent validity (r = 0.81). A score of 3 was identified as the threshold for clinically significant posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Overall, the results indicate that the K-PC-PTSD-5 is a useful, timesaving instrument for screening PTSD symptoms.
Mass Screening* ; Primary Health Care* ; Reproducibility of Results ; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic*

Objective: This study presents the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) checklist for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-fifth edition (DSM-5) (K-PCL-5) and the short form (K-PCL-5-S). Methods: Seventy-one subjects with PTSD, 74 subjects with mood or anxiety disorders, and 99 healthy controls were enrolled. The Korean version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5-research version was used to confirm the presence of PTSD. The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) were used to evaluate the concurrent validity of the K-PCL-5 and K-PCL-5-S. Results: It presented good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α=0.93) and test-retest reliability (r=0.90). The K-PCL-5 and K-PCL-5-S were highly correlated with the BDI-II, BAI, IES-R, STAI-S, and STAI-T. The suggested cutoff score for PTSD was 33 for the K-PCL-5 with a sensitivity of 88.51 and specificity of 89.09, and 6 for the K-PCL-5-S with a sensitivity of 91.95 and specificity of 89.09. The data were best explained with a one-factor model. Conclusion These results demonstrated the good reliability and validity of the K-PCL-5 and K-PCL-5-S, and their suitability as simple tools for PTSD assessment.

BACKGROUND: It is important to define a source of infection when outbreak of Legionella infections has occurred. The performance of a molecular strain typing method was evaluated for environmental and clinical isolates of Legionella pneumophila. METHODS: Thirteen environmental strains, eleven clinical isolates and one type strain (ATCC 33152) of Legionella pneumophila were used for the analysis of pulsed field gel electrophoresis. RESULTS: All 25 strains were discriminated into 21 types. Two strains isolated from different locations in a same building showed different types. Each two, four, and two strains were shown as the same PFGE patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Even though PFGE typing of Legionella pneumophila is excellent for strain differentiation, the same pattern does not necessarily indicate the same source of isolates.
Busan* ; Electrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-Field ; Korea* ; Legionella pneumophila ; Legionella* ; Water*

BACKGROUND: For diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) is one of the most widely used structured diagnostic interviews. METHODS: In this study, we aimed to develop and validate the Korean version of CAPS for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition ([DSM-5] K-CAPS-5). Seventy-one subjects with PTSD, 74 with mood disorder or anxiety disorder, and 99 as healthy controls were enrolled. The Korean version of the structured clinical interview for DSM-5-research version was used to assess the convergent validity of K-CAPS-5. BDI-II, BAI, IES-R, and STAI was used to evaluate the concurrent validity. RESULTS: All subjects completed various psychometric assessments including K-CAPS-5. K-CAPS-5 presented good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.92) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.91). K-CAPS-5 showed strong correlations with the structured clinical interview for DSM-5 PTSD (k = 0.893). Among the three subject groups listed above there were significant differences in the K-CAPS-5 total score. The data were best explained by a six-factor model. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrated the good reliability and validity of K-CAPS-5 and its suitability for use as a simple but structured instrument for PTSD assessment.
Anxiety Disorders ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ; Mood Disorders ; Psychometrics ; Reproducibility of Results ; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic

Objective: The Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R) is a widely used self-report for assessing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), originally aligned with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV diagnostic criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the IES-R under the DSM-5 guidelines and establish a cutoff point for DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis. Methods: A total of 238 participants recruited from multiple psychiatric centers, including 67 patients with PTSD, 72 patients with psychiatric controls, and 99 healthy controls, were included in the study. All participants completed the Korean version of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 research version to confirm the presence of PTSD, the Korean version of PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: The IES-R demonstrated good internal consistency and a high correlation with the PCL-5. Through factor analysis, 5 distinct dimensions emerged within the IES-R: sleep disturbance, intrusion, hyperarousal, avoidance, and numbness-dissociation. A proposed cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R was suggested for identifying patients with PTSD. Conclusion These findings underscore the scale’s concurrent validity with the DSM-5 PTSD criteria and its effectiveness as a screening tool. Implementing a cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R can enhance its utility in identifying DSM-5 PTSD cases.

Objective: The Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R) is a widely used self-report for assessing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), originally aligned with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV diagnostic criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the IES-R under the DSM-5 guidelines and establish a cutoff point for DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis. Methods: A total of 238 participants recruited from multiple psychiatric centers, including 67 patients with PTSD, 72 patients with psychiatric controls, and 99 healthy controls, were included in the study. All participants completed the Korean version of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 research version to confirm the presence of PTSD, the Korean version of PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: The IES-R demonstrated good internal consistency and a high correlation with the PCL-5. Through factor analysis, 5 distinct dimensions emerged within the IES-R: sleep disturbance, intrusion, hyperarousal, avoidance, and numbness-dissociation. A proposed cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R was suggested for identifying patients with PTSD. Conclusion These findings underscore the scale’s concurrent validity with the DSM-5 PTSD criteria and its effectiveness as a screening tool. Implementing a cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R can enhance its utility in identifying DSM-5 PTSD cases.

Objective: The Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R) is a widely used self-report for assessing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), originally aligned with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV diagnostic criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the IES-R under the DSM-5 guidelines and establish a cutoff point for DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis. Methods: A total of 238 participants recruited from multiple psychiatric centers, including 67 patients with PTSD, 72 patients with psychiatric controls, and 99 healthy controls, were included in the study. All participants completed the Korean version of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 research version to confirm the presence of PTSD, the Korean version of PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: The IES-R demonstrated good internal consistency and a high correlation with the PCL-5. Through factor analysis, 5 distinct dimensions emerged within the IES-R: sleep disturbance, intrusion, hyperarousal, avoidance, and numbness-dissociation. A proposed cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R was suggested for identifying patients with PTSD. Conclusion These findings underscore the scale’s concurrent validity with the DSM-5 PTSD criteria and its effectiveness as a screening tool. Implementing a cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R can enhance its utility in identifying DSM-5 PTSD cases.

Objective: The Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R) is a widely used self-report for assessing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), originally aligned with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-IV diagnostic criteria. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the IES-R under the DSM-5 guidelines and establish a cutoff point for DSM-5 PTSD diagnosis. Methods: A total of 238 participants recruited from multiple psychiatric centers, including 67 patients with PTSD, 72 patients with psychiatric controls, and 99 healthy controls, were included in the study. All participants completed the Korean version of the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 research version to confirm the presence of PTSD, the Korean version of PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5), the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, and the Spielberger State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Results: The IES-R demonstrated good internal consistency and a high correlation with the PCL-5. Through factor analysis, 5 distinct dimensions emerged within the IES-R: sleep disturbance, intrusion, hyperarousal, avoidance, and numbness-dissociation. A proposed cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R was suggested for identifying patients with PTSD. Conclusion These findings underscore the scale’s concurrent validity with the DSM-5 PTSD criteria and its effectiveness as a screening tool. Implementing a cutoff score of 25 on the IES-R can enhance its utility in identifying DSM-5 PTSD cases.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of three-dimensional (3D) scalp EEG source imaging (ESI) in partial epilepsy in comparison with the results of presurgical evaluation, magnetoencephalography (MEG), and electrocorticography (ECoG). METHODS: The epilepsy syndrome of 27 partial epilepsy patients was determined by presurgical evaluations. EEG recordings were made using 70 scalp electrodes, and the 3D coordinates of the electrodes were digitized. ESI images of individual and averaged spikes were analyzed by Curry software with a boundary element method. MEG and ECoG were performed in 23 and 9 patients, respectively. RESULTS: ESI and MEG source imaging (MSI) results were well concordant with the results of presurgical evaluations (in 96.3% and 100% cases for ESI and MSI, respectively) at the lobar level. However, there were no spikes in the MEG recordings of three patients. The ESI results were well concordant with MSI results in 90.0% of cases. Compared to ECoG, the ESI results tended to be localized deeper than the cortex, whereas the MSI results were generally localized on the cortical surface. ESI was well concordant with ECoG in 8 of 9 (88.9%) cases, and MSI was also well concordant with ECoG in 4 of 5 (80.0%) cases. The EEG single dipoles in one patient with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy were tightly clustered with the averaged dipole when a 3 Hz high-pass filter was used. CONCLUSIONS: The ESI results were well concordant with the results of the presurgical evaluation, MSI, and ECoG. The ESI analysis was found to be useful for localizing the seizure focus and is recommended for the presurgical evaluation of intractable epilepsy patients.
Electrodes ; Electroencephalography* ; Epilepsies, Partial* ; Epilepsy ; Epilepsy, Temporal Lobe ; Humans ; Insulator Elements ; Magnetoencephalography* ; Scalp ; Seizures

Background: To evaluate workload in emergency rooms (ERs) among clinical specialties including neurology and investigate characteristics of neurological consultations in ER. Methods: A nationwide survey was conducted to evaluate the number of specialists, resident physicians/surgeons, and emergency consultations of each clinical specialty in Korean tertiary referral hospitals from 2018 to 2019. Characteristics of neurological emergency consultations during the same period were investigated in one of the hospitals that participated. Results: A total of 23 hospitals were included. Four irrelevant clinical specialties were excluded. The number of neurology specialists and resident physicians were 12.5/hospital (4.1% of all specialists) and 6.4/hospital (3.4% of all resident physicians/surgeons), respectively, while the mean numbers of specialists and resident physicians or surgeons per clinical specialty were 13.7/hospital and 8.6/hospital, respectively. Neurological consultations accounted for 11.0% of all ER consultations for severe patients (Korean Triage and Acuity Scale level 1-3). Annual ER consultations for severe patients per neurology specialist was 274.1, which was only second to pediatrics (290.0). Annual ER consultations for severe patients per resident physician was 406.6 which was 1.6 times higher than the second highest (internal medicine, 247.0). Frequent conditions for neurological ER consultation were dizziness (24.8%), motor weakness (23.9%), headache (10.6%), dysarthria (9.9%), and seizures (7.7%). Frequent primary diagnoses were cerebrovascular diseases (29.0%) and episodic and paroxysmal disorders (24.9%). Conclusions Workloads of neurology specialists for ER consultation were significantly heavy, and the workload of neurology resident physicians was the heaviest among all specialties. This should be considered in health care policies.