The comprehensive in vitro proarrhythmia assay (CiPA) initiative, led by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), provides a framework for predicting drug-induced arrhythmia risk. To support domestic CiPA implementation, we evaluated the proarrhythmic risk of sildenafil, a phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitor. Sildenafil has been misused recreationally, with reports of highdose non-medical intake. To simulate misuse, in vitro assays were conducted using concentrations up to 100× the maximum therapeutic plasma concentration (Cmax). The assessment followed the three core components of the CiPA paradigm. Patch clamp assays were conducted in Human Embryonic Kidney 293 (HEK293) and Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells transiently expressing Nav1.5, Cav1.2, and hERG ion channels. In silico modeling was performed using the CiPAORdv1.0 model based on IC₅₀ and Hill coefficient values. Functional evaluation included multi-electrode array (MEA) recordings in human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CMs), and in vivo electrocardiography (ECG) analysis in rats was performed to observe QT interval prolongation. Sildenafil significantly inhibited hERG currents by 40.5% at 100× Cmax. In silico modeling predicted a low Torsades de Pointes (TdP) risk based on qNet biomarkers. In contrast, MEA recordings showed a concentration-dependent prolongation of corrected field potential duration (FPDc), with a significant 13.3% increase at 100× Cmax. The TdP risk estimated from MEA modeling was 64%. In vivo ECG analysis revealed significant QT prolongation at 50× Cmax. Despite low in silico TdP predictions, functional assays suggest that high concentrations of sildenafil as in misuse may pose a clinically relevant risk of QT prolongation and arrhythmia.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Objective: The 2020 Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) guidelines recommend the use of feedback devices during CPR training and do not limit their use in actual CPR. Although there have been various studies on metronome-assisted CPR that use a metronome as a feedback device, there are no research results to determine a specific metronome setting rate. We analyzed the quality of CPR and the effectiveness of the metronome feedback according to the metronome setting rate within the recommended chest compression rate range. Methods: Fifty healthcare providers who had received CPR training or had performed CPR in the previous 2 years participated, and all of them performed CPR at three rates (100/min, 110/min, and 120/min). The CPR was performed for 2 minutes with only chest compressions. The smartphone metronome (Metronome version 13.0 Android, KHTSXR, Seoul, Korea) application was used for the rate setting, and Resusci Anne QCPR Mk II (Laerdal Medical, Stavanger, Norway) was used to measure the CPR quality. The difference in the CPR quality according to the setting rate was analyzed. Results: There was no significant difference in the “average compression depth (mm),” “adequate compression depth ratio (%),” and “adequate release ratio (%)” at the three set rates. The “adequate compression rate ratio (%)” was 98.48±5.27% at 110/min, which was higher than that at 120/min or 100/min, and this was a statistically significant difference (P=0.000). There was no significant difference in the “adequate compression site ratio (%).” Conclusion When performing metronome-assisted CPR, setting the rate to 110/min can more appropriately maintain the recommended chest compression rate range and can result in high-quality CPR.