Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerged infectious disease that needs further clinical investigation. Characterizing the temporal pattern of combined infections in patients with COVID-19 may help clinicians understand the clinical nature of this disease and provide valuable diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients isolated in four study hospitals in Korea for one year period from May 2021 to April 2022 when the delta and omicron variants were dominant. The temporal characteristics of combined infections based on specific diagnostic tests were analyzed. Results: A total of 16,967 COVID-19 patients were screened, 2,432 (14.3%) of whom underwent diagnostic microbiologic tests according to the clinical decision-making, 195 of whom had positive test results, and 0.55% (94/16,967) of whom were ultimately considered to have clinically meaningful combined infections. The median duration for the diagnosis of combined infections was 15 (interquartile range [IQR], 5–25) days after admission. The proportion of community-acquired coinfections (≤ 2 days after admission) was 11.7% (11/94), which included bacteremia (10/94, 10.63%) and tuberculosis (1/94, 1.06%). Combined infections after 2 days of admission were diagnosed at median 16 (IQR, 9–26) days, and included bacteremia (72.3%), fungemia (19.3%), cytomegalovirus (CMV) diseases (8.4%), Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia (PJP, 8.4%) and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA, 4.8%). Conclusion Among COVID-19 patients with risk factors for severe complications, 0.55% had laboratory-confirmed combined infections, which included community and nosocomial pathogens in addition to unusual pathogens such as CMV disease, PJP and IPA.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerged infectious disease that needs further clinical investigation. Characterizing the temporal pattern of combined infections in patients with COVID-19 may help clinicians understand the clinical nature of this disease and provide valuable diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients isolated in four study hospitals in Korea for one year period from May 2021 to April 2022 when the delta and omicron variants were dominant. The temporal characteristics of combined infections based on specific diagnostic tests were analyzed. Results: A total of 16,967 COVID-19 patients were screened, 2,432 (14.3%) of whom underwent diagnostic microbiologic tests according to the clinical decision-making, 195 of whom had positive test results, and 0.55% (94/16,967) of whom were ultimately considered to have clinically meaningful combined infections. The median duration for the diagnosis of combined infections was 15 (interquartile range [IQR], 5–25) days after admission. The proportion of community-acquired coinfections (≤ 2 days after admission) was 11.7% (11/94), which included bacteremia (10/94, 10.63%) and tuberculosis (1/94, 1.06%). Combined infections after 2 days of admission were diagnosed at median 16 (IQR, 9–26) days, and included bacteremia (72.3%), fungemia (19.3%), cytomegalovirus (CMV) diseases (8.4%), Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia (PJP, 8.4%) and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA, 4.8%). Conclusion Among COVID-19 patients with risk factors for severe complications, 0.55% had laboratory-confirmed combined infections, which included community and nosocomial pathogens in addition to unusual pathogens such as CMV disease, PJP and IPA.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerged infectious disease that needs further clinical investigation. Characterizing the temporal pattern of combined infections in patients with COVID-19 may help clinicians understand the clinical nature of this disease and provide valuable diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients isolated in four study hospitals in Korea for one year period from May 2021 to April 2022 when the delta and omicron variants were dominant. The temporal characteristics of combined infections based on specific diagnostic tests were analyzed. Results: A total of 16,967 COVID-19 patients were screened, 2,432 (14.3%) of whom underwent diagnostic microbiologic tests according to the clinical decision-making, 195 of whom had positive test results, and 0.55% (94/16,967) of whom were ultimately considered to have clinically meaningful combined infections. The median duration for the diagnosis of combined infections was 15 (interquartile range [IQR], 5–25) days after admission. The proportion of community-acquired coinfections (≤ 2 days after admission) was 11.7% (11/94), which included bacteremia (10/94, 10.63%) and tuberculosis (1/94, 1.06%). Combined infections after 2 days of admission were diagnosed at median 16 (IQR, 9–26) days, and included bacteremia (72.3%), fungemia (19.3%), cytomegalovirus (CMV) diseases (8.4%), Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia (PJP, 8.4%) and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA, 4.8%). Conclusion Among COVID-19 patients with risk factors for severe complications, 0.55% had laboratory-confirmed combined infections, which included community and nosocomial pathogens in addition to unusual pathogens such as CMV disease, PJP and IPA.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a newly emerged infectious disease that needs further clinical investigation. Characterizing the temporal pattern of combined infections in patients with COVID-19 may help clinicians understand the clinical nature of this disease and provide valuable diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed COVID-19 patients isolated in four study hospitals in Korea for one year period from May 2021 to April 2022 when the delta and omicron variants were dominant. The temporal characteristics of combined infections based on specific diagnostic tests were analyzed. Results: A total of 16,967 COVID-19 patients were screened, 2,432 (14.3%) of whom underwent diagnostic microbiologic tests according to the clinical decision-making, 195 of whom had positive test results, and 0.55% (94/16,967) of whom were ultimately considered to have clinically meaningful combined infections. The median duration for the diagnosis of combined infections was 15 (interquartile range [IQR], 5–25) days after admission. The proportion of community-acquired coinfections (≤ 2 days after admission) was 11.7% (11/94), which included bacteremia (10/94, 10.63%) and tuberculosis (1/94, 1.06%). Combined infections after 2 days of admission were diagnosed at median 16 (IQR, 9–26) days, and included bacteremia (72.3%), fungemia (19.3%), cytomegalovirus (CMV) diseases (8.4%), Pneumocystis jerovecii pneumonia (PJP, 8.4%) and invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA, 4.8%). Conclusion Among COVID-19 patients with risk factors for severe complications, 0.55% had laboratory-confirmed combined infections, which included community and nosocomial pathogens in addition to unusual pathogens such as CMV disease, PJP and IPA.

Background: Information on the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron is limited. The clinical response and viral kinetics to therapy in the real world need to be evaluated. Methods: Mild to moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with risk factors for severe illness were prospectively enrolled as a treatment group with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir therapy versus a control group with supportive care. Serial viral load and culture from the upper respiratory tract were evaluated for seven days, and clinical responses and adverse reactions were evaluated for 28 days. Results: A total of 51 patients were analyzed including 40 in the treatment group and 11 in the control group. Faster symptom resolution during hospitalization (P= 0.048) was observed in the treatment group. Only minor adverse reactions were reported in 27.5% of patients. The viral load on Day 7 was lower in the treatment group (P = 0.002). The viral culture showed a positivity of 67.6% (25/37) vs. 100% (6/6) on Day 1, 0% (0/37) vs. 16.7 (1/6) on Day 5, and 0% (0/16) vs. 50.0% (2/4) on Day 7 in the treatment and control groups, respectively. Conclusions Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir against the omicron was safe and resulted in negative viral culture conversion after Day 5 of treatment with better symptomatic resolution.

Background: Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir is highly effective in preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate severity. However, real-world performance data are limited, and the drug is not so acceptable to the COVID-19 patients at high risk who need it in Korea. Methods: To evaluate the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir, we conducted a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study on patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk for a severe disease who were hospitalized at four hospitals in South Korea from February 2022 to April 2022. A total of 236 patients in the treatment group (administered nirmatrelvir-ritonavir) and 236 in the matched control group (supportive care only) were analyzed for the primary outcome, i.e., the time to oxygen support-free survival. The secondary outcome was a composite result of disease progression. The reason for not prescribing nirmatrelvir-ritonavir to the indicated patients was also investigated. Results: The treatment group showed significantly longer oxygen support-free survival than the matched control group (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01–0.31; P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that age (aHR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00–1.07), National Early Warning Score-2 at admission (aHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.08–1.71), nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment, female sex (aHR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.15–0.88), and time from symptom onset to admission (aHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48–0.95) were significantly associated with oxygen therapy. However, none of the factors were related to the composite outcome. In the unmatched control group, 19.9% of 376 patients had documented explanations for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir non-prescription, and 44.0% of these were due to contraindication criteria. In the treatment group, 10.9% of patients discontinued the medication primarily because of adverse events (71.4%), with gastrointestinal symptoms being the most common (50.0%). Conclusion Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir treatment significantly reduced oxygen therapy requirements in high-risk patients with COVID-19 during the omicron variant surge in South Korea. Physicians are encouraged to consider the active use of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and to be watchful for gastrointestinal symptoms during medication.

Background: Human breast milk is essential and provides irreplaceable nutrients for early humans. However, breastfeeding is not easy for various reasons in medical institution environments. Therefore, in order to improve the breastfeeding environment, we investigated the difficult reality of breastfeeding through questionnaire responses from medical institution workers. Methods: A survey was conducted among 179 medical institution workers with experience in childbirth within the last five years. The survey results of 175 people were analyzed, with incoherent answers excluded. Results: Of the 175 people surveyed, a total of 108 people (61.7%) worked during the day, and 33 people (18.9%) worked in three shifts. Among 133 mothers who stayed with their babies in the same nursing room, 111 (93.3%) kept breastfeeding for more than a month, but among those who stayed apart, only 10 (71.4%) continued breastfeeding for more than a month (P = 0.024). Ninety-five (88.0%) of daytime workers, 32 (94.1%) two-shift workers, and 33 (100%) three-shift workers continued breastfeeding for more than a month (P = 0.026). Workers in general hospitals tended to breastfeed for significantly longer than those that worked in tertiary hospitals (P = 0.003). A difference was also noted between occupation categories (P = 0.019), but a more significant difference was found in the comparison between nurses and doctors (P = 0.012). Longer breastfeeding periods were noted when mothers worked three shifts (P = 0.037). Depending on the period planned for breastfeeding prior to childbirth, the actual breastfeeding maintenance period after birth showed a significant difference (P = 0.002). Of 112 mothers who responded to the question regarding difficulties in breastfeeding after returning to work, 87 (77.7%) mentioned a lack of time caused by being busy at work, 82 (73.2%) mentioned the need for places and appropriate circumstances. Conclusion In medical institutions, it is recommended that environmental improvements in medical institutions, the implementation of supporting policies, and the provision of specialized education on breastfeeding are necessary to promote breastfeeding.

Background: This study aimed to describe the maternal, obstetrical, and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and identify the predictors associated with the severity of COVID-19. Methods: This multicenter observational study included consecutive pregnant women admitted because of COVID-19 confirmed using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test at 15 hospitals in the Republic of Korea between January 2020 and December 2021. Results: A total of 257 women with COVID-19 and 62 newborns were included in this study. Most of the patients developed this disease during the third trimester. Nine patients (7.4%) developed pregnancy-related complications. All pregnant women received inpatient treatment, of whom 9 (3.5%) required intensive care, but none of them died. The gestational age at COVID-19 diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 1.096, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.15) and parity (OR, 1.703, 95% CI, 1.13–2.57) were identified as significant risk factors of severe diseases. Among women who delivered, 78.5% underwent cesarean section. Preterm birth (38.5%), premature rupture of membranes (7.7%), and miscarriage (4.6%) occurred, but there was no stillbirth or neonatal death. The RT-PCR test of newborns’ amniotic fluid and umbilical cord blood samples was negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Conclusion At the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, gestational age and parity of pregnant women were the risk factors of disease severity. Vertical transmission of COVID-19 was not observed, and maternal severity did not significantly affect the neonatal prognosis.

Background: In 2015, the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) working group published consensus guidelines for treating atopic dermatitis (AD). Objective: We aimed to provide updated consensus recommendations for systemic treatment of AD in South Korea based on recent evidence and experience. Methods: We compiled a database of references from relevant systematic reviews and guidelines on the systemic management of AD. Evidence for each statement was graded and classified based on thestrength of the recommendation. Forty-two council members from the KADA participated in three rounds of voting to establish a consensus on expert recommendations. Results: We do not recommend long-term treatment with systemic steroids forpatients with moderate-to-severe AD due to the risk of adverse effects. We recommend treatment with cyclosporine or dupilumab and selective treatment with methotrexate or azathioprine for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We suggest treatment with antihistamines as an option for alleviating clinical symptoms of AD. We recommend selective treatment with narrowband ultraviolet B for patients with chronic moderate-to-severe AD. We do not recommend treatment with oral antibiotics for patients with moderate-to-severe AD but who have no signs of infection. We did not reach a consensus on recommendations for treatment with allergen-specific immunotherapy, probiotics, evening primrose oil, orvitamin D for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We also recommend educational interventions and counselling for patients with AD and caregivers to improve the treatment success rate. Conclusion We look forward to implementing a new and updated consensus of systemic therapy in controlling patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the chest computed tomography (CT) findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with mild clinical symptoms at a single hospital in South Korea. Materials and Methods: CT scans of 87 COVID-19 patients [43 men and 44 women; median age:41 years (interquartile range: 26.1–51.0 years)] with mild clinical symptoms (fever < 38℃ and no dyspnea) were evaluated. Results: CT findings were normal in 39 (44.8%) and abnormal in 48 (55.2%) patients. Among the 48 patients with lung opacities, 17 (35.4%) had unilateral disease and 31 (64.6%) had bilateral disease. One (2.1%) patient showed subpleural distribution, 9 (18.8%) showed peribronchovascular distribution, and 38 (79.2%) showed subpleural and peribronchovascular distributions.Twenty-two (45.8%) patients had pure ground-glass opacities (GGOs) with no consolidation, 17 (35.4%) had mixed opacities dominated by GGOs, and 9 (18.8%) had mixed opacities dominated by consolidation. No patients demonstrated consolidation without GGOs. Conclusion The most common CT finding of COVID-19 in patients with mild clinical symptoms was bilateral multiple GGO-dominant lesions with subpleural and peribronchovascular distribution and lower lung predilection. The initial chest CT of almost half of COVID-19 patients with mild clinical symptoms showed no lung parenchymal lesions. Compared to relatively severe cases, mild cases were more likely to manifest as unilateral disease with pure GGOs or GGOdominant mixed opacities and less likely to show air bronchogram.