Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Purpose: Nursing students are future healthcare workers responsible for maintaining public health. Owing to the increase in early resignation among new nurses, nursing education outcomes must be evaluated by investigating students' practice readiness. Methods: Using convenience sampling, we recruited fourth-year students from two nursing colleges to participate in a cross-sectional online survey in November 2023. The Casey-Fink Readiness for Practice Survey was used to assess practice readiness and the data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, and ANOVA. Results: Among the 157 participants (female, 77.7%; mean age, 23.12±1.93 yrs), the overall practice readiness score was 63.53±8.30 (range: 20~80) and the mean subscale score was 23.14±3.73 for clinical problem-solving (range: 7~28), 6.69±1.25 for learning techniques (range: 2~8), 16.87±2.46 for professional identity (range: 5~20), and 16.82±3.46 for trials and tribulations (range: 6~24). Practice readiness did not differ significantly by gender or age and was greater among subgroups with high grades and satisfaction with the major, classroom practice, simulation practice, clinical practice, and lectures. Conclusion Universities must improve the quality of classes and practical education to enhance fourth-year nursing students’ practice readiness.Nursing education programs incorporating problem-based learning must be developed and evaluated to strengthen students’ clinical inference and critical-thinking skills.

Purpose: This methodological study was conducted to develop a scale to measure communication self-efficacy in nurses and examine its validity and reliability. Methods: We selected 54 initial items from literature reviews and interviews with 10 clinical nurses. Thirty-two preliminary items were derived from consultations with 10 experts. To verify the scale’s factor structure, we conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) among 469 nurses. Data were analyzed using item analysis, EFA, CFA, discriminant validity, convergent validity, and internal consistency using IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 29.0 (IBM Corp.) and IBM SPSS AMOS ver. 20.0 (IBM Corp.). Results: The scale consisted of 18 items with three factors (ability to apply therapeutic communication skills, crisis management capabilities, and communication competence), which explained 46.1% of the total variance. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were confirmed for the factors. CFA supported the fit of the measurement model comprising three factors (standardized root mean square residual=.04, root mean square error of approximation=.03, goodness of fit index=.92, Tucker-Lewis index=.97, comparative fit index=.98, normed fit index=.89, critical N=216). Internal consistency was confirmed by a Cronbach’s α coefficient of .91. Conclusion The communication self-efficacy scale for nurses is expected to measure communication self-efficacy among nurses. It will be useful for improving nurses’ professional communication abilities.

Purpose: Nursing students are future healthcare workers responsible for maintaining public health. Owing to the increase in early resignation among new nurses, nursing education outcomes must be evaluated by investigating students' practice readiness. Methods: Using convenience sampling, we recruited fourth-year students from two nursing colleges to participate in a cross-sectional online survey in November 2023. The Casey-Fink Readiness for Practice Survey was used to assess practice readiness and the data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, and ANOVA. Results: Among the 157 participants (female, 77.7%; mean age, 23.12±1.93 yrs), the overall practice readiness score was 63.53±8.30 (range: 20~80) and the mean subscale score was 23.14±3.73 for clinical problem-solving (range: 7~28), 6.69±1.25 for learning techniques (range: 2~8), 16.87±2.46 for professional identity (range: 5~20), and 16.82±3.46 for trials and tribulations (range: 6~24). Practice readiness did not differ significantly by gender or age and was greater among subgroups with high grades and satisfaction with the major, classroom practice, simulation practice, clinical practice, and lectures. Conclusion Universities must improve the quality of classes and practical education to enhance fourth-year nursing students’ practice readiness.Nursing education programs incorporating problem-based learning must be developed and evaluated to strengthen students’ clinical inference and critical-thinking skills.

Purpose: This methodological study was conducted to develop a scale to measure communication self-efficacy in nurses and examine its validity and reliability. Methods: We selected 54 initial items from literature reviews and interviews with 10 clinical nurses. Thirty-two preliminary items were derived from consultations with 10 experts. To verify the scale’s factor structure, we conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) among 469 nurses. Data were analyzed using item analysis, EFA, CFA, discriminant validity, convergent validity, and internal consistency using IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 29.0 (IBM Corp.) and IBM SPSS AMOS ver. 20.0 (IBM Corp.). Results: The scale consisted of 18 items with three factors (ability to apply therapeutic communication skills, crisis management capabilities, and communication competence), which explained 46.1% of the total variance. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were confirmed for the factors. CFA supported the fit of the measurement model comprising three factors (standardized root mean square residual=.04, root mean square error of approximation=.03, goodness of fit index=.92, Tucker-Lewis index=.97, comparative fit index=.98, normed fit index=.89, critical N=216). Internal consistency was confirmed by a Cronbach’s α coefficient of .91. Conclusion The communication self-efficacy scale for nurses is expected to measure communication self-efficacy among nurses. It will be useful for improving nurses’ professional communication abilities.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Purpose: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic led to significant changes in clinical clerkships, including reduced ward rounds. We aimed to determine how the pandemic–induced changes in the clinical practice environment affect the clinical performance of medical students. Methods: We analyzed objective structured clinical examination scores of third- and fourth-year medical students from 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 across six stations by the Seoul–Gyeonggi Consortium. Clinical, communication, and ability scores were measured and analyzed using repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance. Results: The interaction between clinical practice progress and pandemic-induced changes significantly affected physical examination and medical history scores, though the differences were not substantial. Patient-physician interaction significance varied by measurement period. Clinical communication ability also showed significant differences based on the measurement period and practical experience. Conclusion During the pandemic, alternative learning methods, including self–learning, simulation/practice, and peer role–play, helped improve medical competency in areas such as history–taking and physical examination. However, these were less effective in improving patient–physician interactions or clinical communication efficacy. Alternative learning methods have limitations, and they cannot replace direct patient encounters in clinical practice.

Background: Osteoporosis is a significant public health issue in aging populations. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, underdiagnosis and undertreatment remain prevalent even in patients with recent fractures. This study examined 20-year trends (2002– 2022) in anti-osteoporotic medication (AOM) usage in South Korea. Methods: Data from the Korean National Health Information Database were retrospectively analyzed. The study included individuals aged ≥50 years and analyzed prescription trends, medication adherence, measured by the medication possession ratio (MPR), and treatment initiation rates post-fracture. The AOMs examined included bisphosphonates, selective estrogen receptor modulators, denosumab (DMAB), teriparatide (TPTD), and romosozumab (ROMO). Results: Over two decades, AOM use has shifted significantly from oral to injectable formulations, with injectables surpassing oral medications in 2020; from 397,440 prescriptions in 2016 to 1,162,779 in 2022. Prescriptions for DMAB surged following its approval as a first-line therapy in 2019, increasing 2.65 times from 217,606 in 2019 to 575,595 in 2022. The MPR improved from 35.4% in 2003 to 73.2% in 2021, with females demonstrating higher adherence than males. Post-fracture treatment rates increased from 31.1% in 2006 to 39.9% in 2021 but remained below 50%. Vertebral fractures had the highest treatment initiation rates, while anabolic agents, such as TPTD and ROMO were underprescribed despite their efficacy. Conclusions This 20-year analysis highlights significant progress in osteoporosis management in South Korea, including a shift towards injectable therapies and improved adherence. However, the persistent undertreatment of high-risk patients underscores the requirement for enhanced access to anabolic agents, clinician education, and policy reforms to optimize post-fracture care.

Background/Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) 3.0 for predicting mortality and liver-related complications compared with the Child-Pugh classification, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade, the MELD, and the MELD sodium (MELDNa) score. Methods: We evaluated a multicenter retrospective cohort of incorporated patients with cirrhosis between 2013 and 2019. We conducted comparisons of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the MELD3.0 and other models for predicting 3-month mortality. Additionally, we assessed the risk of cirrhosis-related complications according to the MELD3.0 score. Results: A total of 3,314 patients were included. The mean age was 55.9±11.3 years, and 70.2% of the patients were male. Within the initial 3 months, 220 patients (6.6%) died, and the MELD3.0had the best predictive performance among the tested models, with an AUROC of 0.851, outperforming the Child-Pugh classification, ALBI grade, MELD, and MELDNa. A high MELD3.0score was associated with an increased risk of mortality. Compared with that of the group with a MELD3.0 score <10 points, the adjusted hazard ratio of the group with a score of 10–20 pointswas 2.176, and that for the group with a score of ≥20 points was 4.892. Each 1-point increase inthe MELD3.0 score increased the risk of cirrhosis-related complications by 1.033-fold. The risk of hepatorenal syndrome showed the highest increase, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.149, followed by hepatic encephalopathy and ascites. Conclusions The MELD3.0 demonstrated robust prognostic performance in predicting mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Moreover, the MELD3.0 score was linked to cirrhosis-related complications, particularly those involving kidney function, such as hepatorenal syndrome and ascites.

Purpose: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) or fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) are increasingly used as initial therapies for brain metastases (BM). We aimed to assess the outcomes of SRS/FSRT in patients aged ≥ 65 years who had 1-10 BM from non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 91 elderly NSCLC patients with 222 BM who were treated with SRS/FSRT at two institutions between 2010 and 2020. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) after SRS/FSRT. In addition, in-field local control (IFLC) within the treated field was evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed to identify the prognostic factors affecting OS and IFLC. Results: During a median follow-up of 18 months, the median OS was 32 months. The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 69.8% and 56.1%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the NSCLC-specific graded prognostic assessment (GPA) score (p=0.007) and administration of systemic therapy (p=0.039) were defined as prognosticators affecting OS. The median IFLC period was 31 months, and the 1- and 2-year IFLC rates were 75.9% and 57.6%, respectively. The total BM volume (p=0.042) significantly affected IFLC. No severe adverse events were reported after SRS/FSRT. Conclusion SRS/FSRT is an effective upfront treatment option for BM arising from NSCLC in elderly patients, with a good OS without severe side effects. Higher GPA score and active systemic treatment were associated with improved OS, indicating that elderly patients are significant candidates for SRS/FSRT.