PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify a research trend of studies related to the Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) decision making process in Korea. METHODS: Assessing through five computerized databases, 889 studies were reviewed and of these 32 were included. An integrative literature review and text network analysis were applied to examine the research. The keywords from each article's abstracts were extracted by using a program, KrKwic. RESULTS: The number of studies on DNR decision has been increasing, especially since 2011. A descriptive study design (59%) was most commonly used in the research. In relation to factors affecting DNR decision, 97% of the studies stated patient factors and 66% stated family factors. 'Patient', 'DNR', 'decision', 'treatment', 'life', 'family' were the major keywords, and 'patient' and 'care' were dominant keywords that ranked high in coappearance frequency. CONCLUSION: Studies related to DNR decision have been increasing, and themes of the studies have also been broader. Further research is required to investigate factors affecting DNR decision in specific populations such as cancer patients, the elderly, patients with end-stage of chronic diseases etc. Moreover, a comparative study is necessary to define differences of research trends related to DNR decision making process between Korea and other countries.
Aged ; Chronic Disease ; Decision Making ; Humans ; Korea ; Resuscitation Orders

Objective: The study’s aim was to evaluate the validity of the Korean version of the University of California San Diego Performance-based Skills Assessment, Validation of Intermediate Measures (K-UPSA-2-VIM) in patients with dementia (D), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and cognitive normal control group (CN). Methods: Study participants were 25 patients with D, 43 patients with MCI, and 111 controls with CN group, respectively. For cognitive assessment, Mini Mental State Examination, Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease neuropsychological battery, and Clinical Dementia Rating were used. For functional assessment, Barthel-Activities of Daily Living, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, Dementia Screening questionnaire, and K-UPSA-2-VIM were used. Results: Statistically significant differences were observed in all subdomains and total score of the K-UPSA-2-VIM among three cognitive groups. K-UPSA-2-VIM demonstrated 75.7% of sensitivity and 65.1% of specificity, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.731 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.641-0.821, p<0.001) in discriminating between CN and MCI groups. In discriminating between MCI and D groups, 76.7% of sensitivity and 64.0% of specificity, with an AUC of 0.706 (95% CI: 0.580-0.833, p=0.005) were demonstrated. Conclusion The K-UPSA-2-VIM is useful to evaluate activities of daily living function in Korean patients with D and MCI.

Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the DSM-5 Level 2 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure–inattention [Swanson, Nolan and Pelham, version IV (SNAP-IV)] and anger [Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anger] for parents and guardians of children aged 6–17 years. Methods: We included 104 children and adolescents diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), ADHD with anxiety and depression, depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and tic disorder with somatic symptoms (ADHD=41, depression=9, anxiety=14, ADHD+anxious depression=11, tic+somatic symptoms=29). Their ages ranged from 8 years to 15 years. The participants’ mothers completed the SNAP-IV, PROMIS Anger scale, Korean version of the IOWA Conners Rating Scale (K-IOWA), and Korean ADHD Rating Scale (K-ARS) so that the reliability and validity of the SNAP-IV and PROMIS Anger scales, which are DSM-5 scales for assessing inattention and anger of children and adolescents, could be examined. Results: The reliability coefficient of SNAP-IV (Cronbach’s α) was 0.94. The correlation coefficients between SNAP-IV, K-IOWA inattention, and K-ARS inattention scores ranged from 0.73 to 0.86. The mean SNAP-IV scores of the ADHD and the ADHD+anxious depression groups were significantly higher than those of the anxiety and the tic+somatic symptoms groups. The reliability coefficient of the PROMIS Anger was 0.91. The correlation coefficient between PROMIS Anger and K-IOWA oppositional/defiant scores was 0.75.The PROMIS Anger mean score of the ADHD+anxious depression group tended to be higher than that of the other groups. Conclusion These results suggest that the Korean version of the DSM-5 Level 2 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure–inattention and anger for parent and guardian of child age 6–17 might be a reliable and valid test and may be useful for screening children and adolescents with ADHD.

Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the DSM-5 Level 2 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure–inattention [Swanson, Nolan and Pelham, version IV (SNAP-IV)] and anger [Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anger] for parents and guardians of children aged 6–17 years. Methods: We included 104 children and adolescents diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), ADHD with anxiety and depression, depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and tic disorder with somatic symptoms (ADHD=41, depression=9, anxiety=14, ADHD+anxious depression=11, tic+somatic symptoms=29). Their ages ranged from 8 years to 15 years. The participants’ mothers completed the SNAP-IV, PROMIS Anger scale, Korean version of the IOWA Conners Rating Scale (K-IOWA), and Korean ADHD Rating Scale (K-ARS) so that the reliability and validity of the SNAP-IV and PROMIS Anger scales, which are DSM-5 scales for assessing inattention and anger of children and adolescents, could be examined. Results: The reliability coefficient of SNAP-IV (Cronbach’s α) was 0.94. The correlation coefficients between SNAP-IV, K-IOWA inattention, and K-ARS inattention scores ranged from 0.73 to 0.86. The mean SNAP-IV scores of the ADHD and the ADHD+anxious depression groups were significantly higher than those of the anxiety and the tic+somatic symptoms groups. The reliability coefficient of the PROMIS Anger was 0.91. The correlation coefficient between PROMIS Anger and K-IOWA oppositional/defiant scores was 0.75.The PROMIS Anger mean score of the ADHD+anxious depression group tended to be higher than that of the other groups. Conclusion These results suggest that the Korean version of the DSM-5 Level 2 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure–inattention and anger for parent and guardian of child age 6–17 might be a reliable and valid test and may be useful for screening children and adolescents with ADHD.