OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

Background and Objectives: The number of people with heart failure (HF) is increasing worldwide, and the social burden is increasing as HF has high mortality and morbidity. We aimed to provide updated trends on the epidemiology of HF in Korea to shape future social measures against HF. Methods: We used the National Health Information Database of the National Health Insurance Service to determine the prevalence, incidence, hospitalization rate, mortality rate, comorbidities, in-hospital mortality, and healthcare cost of patients with HF from 2002 to 2020 in Korea. Results: The prevalence of HF in the total Korean population rose from 0.77% in 2002 to 2.58% (1,326,886 people) in 2020. Although the age-standardized incidence of HF decreased over the past 18 years, the age-standardized prevalence increased. In 2020, the hospitalization rate for any cause in patients with HF was 1,166 per 100,000 persons, with a steady increase from 2002. In 2002, the HF mortality was 3.0 per 100,000 persons, which rose to 15.6 per 100,000 persons in 2020. While hospitalization rates and in-hospital mortality for patients with HF increased, the mortality rate for patients with HF did not (5.8% in 2020), and the one-year survival rate from the first diagnosis of HF improved. The total healthcare costs for patients with HF were approximately $2.4 billion in 2020, a 16-fold increase over the $0.15 billion in 2002. Conclusions The study’s results underscore the growing socioeconomic burden of HF in Korea, driven by an aging population and increasing HF prevalence.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

Background: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). Results: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). Conclusion The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.

Objectives: Alcohol is metabolized to acetaldehyde by alcohol dehydrogenase enzyme in the liver and then acetaldehyde is metabolized to acetone by aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) in the liver. There are two main ALDH enzymes which metabolize the acetaldehyde produced during ethanol oxidation. In particular, in the presence of the ALDH2 1*2 allele, the activity of the ALDH 2 enzyme is lowered. As a result, acetaldehyde metabolism is slowed down and acetaldehyde accumulates in the body compared to the ALDH2 1*1 allele. There are many studies that have investigated the blood acetaldehyde concentration according to the ALDH2 genotype, but there are few studies to compare this with age. So we investigated the blood acetaldehyde concentration according to ALDH2 genotype, age and gender. Methods: According to the ALDH2 genotype, we divided the group by gender and age. We divided the age group in to three groups which ranged from 20 to 34 years old, from 35 to 49 years old, and lastly from 50 to 64 years old. And then we collected blood samples after 15 min, 30 min, 1 hr, 2 hr, 3 hr, 4 hr, 5 hr and 15 hr of after drinking to measure the blood acetaldehyde concentration. Results: In ALDH2 1*2 allele group, there are significant differences of the blood acetaldehyde concentration between the age groups. In ALDH2 1*2 allele and male group, there are significant differences of the blood acetaldehyde concentration between the age groups. Conclusions There are significant differences of the blood acetaldehyde concentration between the age groups according to ALDH2 genotype. Also, there are significant differences of the blood acetaldehyde concentration between the age groups with male gender and ALDH2 1*2 allele. Studies about other factors that may influence the blood acetaldehyde concentration are needed.

Objectives: The effectiveness of drugs currently used in medication, which is important in the treatment of alcohol use disorders, is limited. Recently, ondansetron which acts as 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, has been studied and proved possibility as new medication for alcohol use disorder. Meanwhile, there are studies supporting that 5-HT1A receptors are related to addictive behavior. Considering those studies, we expect that vortioxetine, which acts as both 5-HT3 receptor antagonist and 5-HT1A receptor agonist, may be effective in treatment of alcohol use disorder. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of vortioxetine on alcohol intake of C57BL/6 mice. Methods: In this study C57BL/6 mice were randomly assigned to normal saline group, vortioxetine 10 mg/kg group and vortioxetine 1 mg/kg group. To study effect of vortioxetine on alcohol, water, food intake and body weight of mice, we administered each medication for 14 days. Results: The overall alcohol intake was different between the three groups (PGroup=0.021), and alcohol intake in vortioxetine 10 mg/kg group was significantly lower than one in placebo group. Change across time points (PTime<0.001) and the interaction between group and time (PGroup×Time =0.016) were also significant. However, there were no significant differences between the three groups in water, food intake and body weight. Conclusions These results indicated that administration of high dose vortioxetine reduced alcohol intake of mice.Therefore, it is necessary to conduct clinical studies to examine the effectiveness of vortioxetine as a new treatment for alcohol use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Beating cardiomyocyte regeneration therapies have revealed as alternative therapeutics for heart transplantation. Nonetheless, the importance of nitric oxide (NO) in cardiomyocyte regeneration has been widely suggested, little has been reported concerning endogenous NO during cardiomyocyte differentiation. METHODS: Here, we used P19CL6 cells and a Myocardiac infarction (MI) model to confirm NO-induced protein modification and its role in cardiac beating. Two tyrosine (Tyr) residues of b2-tubulin (Y106 and Y340) underwent nitrosylation (Tyr-NO) by endogenously generated NO during cardiomyocyte differentiation from pre-cardiomyocyte-like P19CL6 cells. RESULTS: Tyr-NO-b2-tubulin mediated the interaction with Stathmin, which promotes microtubule disassembly, and was prominently observed in spontaneously beating cell clusters and mouse embryonic heart (E11.5d). In myocardial infarction mice, Tyr-NO-b2-tubulin in transplanted cells was closely related with cardiac troponin-T expression with their functional recovery, reduced infarct size and thickened left ventricular wall. CONCLUSION This is the first discovery of a new target molecule of NO, b2-tubulin, that can promote normal cardiac beating and cardiomyocyte regeneration. Taken together, we suggest therapeutic potential of Tyr-NO-b2-tubulin, for ischemic cardiomyocyte, which can reduce unexpected side effect of stem cell transplantation, arrhythmogenesis.

Regdanvimab is the only monoclonal antibody available in Korea that targets severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical characteristics of 374 adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who were treated with regdanvimab from September through December 2021. In total, 322 (86.1%) patients exhibited risk factors for disease progression. Most patients (91.4%) improved without additional treatment. No patient died or was transferred to intensive care. This study shows that regdanvimab prevented disease progression in high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 infections during Delta variant predominance.