Background: The proportion of women doctors has been rising globally and South Korea mirrors this trend. Despite this growth, women doctors’ representation in leadership roles in academic medical fields remains scarce. This study investigates the representation and trends of women doctors’ leadership in editorial boards of South Korean medical journals, and compares the gender ratio of specialists. Methods: This non-clinical data analysis examined the editorial boards of 45 major medical academic journals published in 2015, 2020, and 2024 to investigate women leadership within journal editorial boards, compares the gender ratio of specialists, and observed changes over time. Results: The study included data from 1,475 members in 2015, 1,598 in 2020, and 2,531 in 2024.In 2020, 23.8% of specialists were women, but only 19.5% of editorial board members were women (P < 0.001). Nine journals had less than 10% women representation on their editorial boards. Over nine years, women representation on editorial boards increased from 16.8% in 2015 to 21.3% in 2024 (P = 0.001), with significant increases in societies of clinical medicine (14.6% vs. 20.0%; P < 0.001) but not in basic medicine. Journals with women editors-in-chief had significantly higher women representation on their boards compared to ones with male editorsin-chief (36.7 ± 13.5% vs. 18.4 ± 10.9%, P < 0.001). The proportion of women senior editorial roles and that of women executive society members showed a significant positive correlation with the proportion of women on editorial boards (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion The study highlights the considerable underrepresentation of women in editorial leadership compared to their presence as specialists. However, the number of women editorial board members has increased over the past decade, especially in clinical medicine. Women doctors’ leadership positively correlates with higher women participation on boards, which suggests that promoting women leaders could enhance gender diversity in academic medicine. Further qualitative research is needed to explore the impact of women doctors’ leadership on medical research and patient outcomes. This study provides critical insights into gender disparities in South Korean medical academia and underscores the need for policies to promote women doctors’ leadership.

Background: The proportion of women doctors has been rising globally and South Korea mirrors this trend. Despite this growth, women doctors’ representation in leadership roles in academic medical fields remains scarce. This study investigates the representation and trends of women doctors’ leadership in editorial boards of South Korean medical journals, and compares the gender ratio of specialists. Methods: This non-clinical data analysis examined the editorial boards of 45 major medical academic journals published in 2015, 2020, and 2024 to investigate women leadership within journal editorial boards, compares the gender ratio of specialists, and observed changes over time. Results: The study included data from 1,475 members in 2015, 1,598 in 2020, and 2,531 in 2024.In 2020, 23.8% of specialists were women, but only 19.5% of editorial board members were women (P < 0.001). Nine journals had less than 10% women representation on their editorial boards. Over nine years, women representation on editorial boards increased from 16.8% in 2015 to 21.3% in 2024 (P = 0.001), with significant increases in societies of clinical medicine (14.6% vs. 20.0%; P < 0.001) but not in basic medicine. Journals with women editors-in-chief had significantly higher women representation on their boards compared to ones with male editorsin-chief (36.7 ± 13.5% vs. 18.4 ± 10.9%, P < 0.001). The proportion of women senior editorial roles and that of women executive society members showed a significant positive correlation with the proportion of women on editorial boards (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion The study highlights the considerable underrepresentation of women in editorial leadership compared to their presence as specialists. However, the number of women editorial board members has increased over the past decade, especially in clinical medicine. Women doctors’ leadership positively correlates with higher women participation on boards, which suggests that promoting women leaders could enhance gender diversity in academic medicine. Further qualitative research is needed to explore the impact of women doctors’ leadership on medical research and patient outcomes. This study provides critical insights into gender disparities in South Korean medical academia and underscores the need for policies to promote women doctors’ leadership.

Background: The proportion of women doctors has been rising globally and South Korea mirrors this trend. Despite this growth, women doctors’ representation in leadership roles in academic medical fields remains scarce. This study investigates the representation and trends of women doctors’ leadership in editorial boards of South Korean medical journals, and compares the gender ratio of specialists. Methods: This non-clinical data analysis examined the editorial boards of 45 major medical academic journals published in 2015, 2020, and 2024 to investigate women leadership within journal editorial boards, compares the gender ratio of specialists, and observed changes over time. Results: The study included data from 1,475 members in 2015, 1,598 in 2020, and 2,531 in 2024.In 2020, 23.8% of specialists were women, but only 19.5% of editorial board members were women (P < 0.001). Nine journals had less than 10% women representation on their editorial boards. Over nine years, women representation on editorial boards increased from 16.8% in 2015 to 21.3% in 2024 (P = 0.001), with significant increases in societies of clinical medicine (14.6% vs. 20.0%; P < 0.001) but not in basic medicine. Journals with women editors-in-chief had significantly higher women representation on their boards compared to ones with male editorsin-chief (36.7 ± 13.5% vs. 18.4 ± 10.9%, P < 0.001). The proportion of women senior editorial roles and that of women executive society members showed a significant positive correlation with the proportion of women on editorial boards (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion The study highlights the considerable underrepresentation of women in editorial leadership compared to their presence as specialists. However, the number of women editorial board members has increased over the past decade, especially in clinical medicine. Women doctors’ leadership positively correlates with higher women participation on boards, which suggests that promoting women leaders could enhance gender diversity in academic medicine. Further qualitative research is needed to explore the impact of women doctors’ leadership on medical research and patient outcomes. This study provides critical insights into gender disparities in South Korean medical academia and underscores the need for policies to promote women doctors’ leadership.

Background: The proportion of women doctors has been rising globally and South Korea mirrors this trend. Despite this growth, women doctors’ representation in leadership roles in academic medical fields remains scarce. This study investigates the representation and trends of women doctors’ leadership in editorial boards of South Korean medical journals, and compares the gender ratio of specialists. Methods: This non-clinical data analysis examined the editorial boards of 45 major medical academic journals published in 2015, 2020, and 2024 to investigate women leadership within journal editorial boards, compares the gender ratio of specialists, and observed changes over time. Results: The study included data from 1,475 members in 2015, 1,598 in 2020, and 2,531 in 2024.In 2020, 23.8% of specialists were women, but only 19.5% of editorial board members were women (P < 0.001). Nine journals had less than 10% women representation on their editorial boards. Over nine years, women representation on editorial boards increased from 16.8% in 2015 to 21.3% in 2024 (P = 0.001), with significant increases in societies of clinical medicine (14.6% vs. 20.0%; P < 0.001) but not in basic medicine. Journals with women editors-in-chief had significantly higher women representation on their boards compared to ones with male editorsin-chief (36.7 ± 13.5% vs. 18.4 ± 10.9%, P < 0.001). The proportion of women senior editorial roles and that of women executive society members showed a significant positive correlation with the proportion of women on editorial boards (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusion The study highlights the considerable underrepresentation of women in editorial leadership compared to their presence as specialists. However, the number of women editorial board members has increased over the past decade, especially in clinical medicine. Women doctors’ leadership positively correlates with higher women participation on boards, which suggests that promoting women leaders could enhance gender diversity in academic medicine. Further qualitative research is needed to explore the impact of women doctors’ leadership on medical research and patient outcomes. This study provides critical insights into gender disparities in South Korean medical academia and underscores the need for policies to promote women doctors’ leadership.

Background: As female social participation increases, the importance of femininity in leadership also increases. In Korea in 2021, 26.8% of 132,013 doctors and 35.1% of 3,099 medical students were female. However, no research has been conducted on the gender demographics of medical leaders. This study aims to define Korean medical leadership, investigate the gender ratio, and determine whether the proportion of women leaders differs in the academic and non-academic worlds. Methods: Korean medical leaders were defined as those in director or higher-level positions in organizations affiliated with the Korean Medical Association, 34 organizing societies under the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences (KAMS), and those who held dean and vice dean positions in 40 medical schools. Academic societies comprised KAMS, KAMS-affiliated societies, and medical schools; the rest were classified as non-academic organizations. Data were collected through website, e-mail, or telephonic surveys. Differences in the number of women leaders between academics and non-academics were analyzed using the chi-square test. Results: In total, 1,863 medical leaders were evaluated, with females accounting for 12.6%. The difference in the ratio of female leaders between academic and non-academic societies was not statistically significant (13.1% academic vs. 11.8% non-academic; P=0.445). Conclusion The proportion of women leaders in the Korean medical field is relatively low compared with that of female doctors and medical students. The number of women in leadership positions and their effect on medical society will be observed periodically.

Intravenous infusion flow regulators (IIFRs) are widely used devices but it is unknown how much the difference between the IIFR scale and the actual flow rate depends on the viscosity of the intravenous (IV) fluid. This study evaluated the effects of viscosity on the flow rate of five IV fluids (0.9% normal saline, Hartmann’s solution, plasma solution-A, 6% hetastarch, and 5% albumin) when using IIFRs. The viscosity of crystalloids was 1.07–1.12 mPa·s, and the viscosities of 6% hetastarch and 5% albumin were 2.59 times and 1.74 times that of normal saline, respectively. When the IIFR scales were preset to 20, 100, and 250 mL/hr, crystalloids were delivered at the preset flow rate within a difference of less than 10%, while 6% hetastarch was delivered at approximately 40% of the preset flow rates and 5% albumin was approximately 80% transmitted. When delivering colloids, IIFRs should be used with caution.

Precise fluid administration is important to prevent hypo- or hypervolemia. However, the accuracy of scales marked on intravenous (IV) fluid plastic bags had remained unknown. Ten 1 L sized IV crystalloids were prepared from each of three manufacturers (H, J, and D). At each scale, the actual volume of the IV fluid was measured. Differences with the measured volumes for each scale were investigated between the three manufacturers. All initial total volume was greater than 1 L. Except for the full-filled level, H overfilled, whereas J and D filled less. For J and D, the maximal differences between the scale and the measured volume were about 200 mL. Fluid volumes of each scale were significantly different among the three manufacturers (P < 0.001). It is inaccurate to measure the amount of fluid depending on the IV bag scales. Clinicians must use electronic infusion pumps for accurate fluid administration.

The Korean Medical Association opposes the illegal attempt to implement the physician assistant (PA) system in Korea. The exact meaning of ‘PA’ in Korea at present time is ’Unlicensed Assistant (UA)’ since it is not legally established in our healthcare system. Thus, PA in Korea refers to unlawful, unqualified, auxiliary personnel for medical practitioners. There have been several issues with the illegal PA system in Korea facing medicosocial conflicts and crisis. Patients want to be diagnosed and treated by medically-educated, licensed and professionally trained physicians not PAs. In clinical settings, PAs deprive the training and educational opportunities of trainees such as interns and residents. Recently, there have been several attempts, by CEO or directors of major hospitals in Korea, to adopt and legalize this system without general consensus from medical professional associations and societies. Without such consensus, this illegal implementation of PA system will create new and additional very serious medical crises due to unlawful medical, educational, professional conflicts and safety issues in medical practice. Before considering the implementation of the PA system, there needs to be a convincing justification by solving the fundamental problems beforehand, such as the collapsed medical delivery system, protection and provision of optimal education program and training environment of trainees, burnout from excessive workloads of physicians with very low compensational system and poor conditions for working and education, etc.

The Korean Medical Association opposes the illegal attempt to implement the physician assistant (PA) system in Korea. The exact meaning of ‘PA’ in Korea at present time is ’Unlicensed Assistant (UA)’ since it is not legally established in our healthcare system. Thus, PA in Korea refers to unlawful, unqualified, auxiliary personnel for medical practitioners. There have been several issues with the illegal PA system in Korea facing medicosocial conflicts and crisis. Patients want to be diagnosed and treated by medically-educated, licensed and professionally trained physicians not PAs. In clinical settings, PAs deprive the training and educational opportunities of trainees such as interns and residents. Recently, there have been several attempts, by CEO or directors of major hospitals in Korea, to adopt and legalize this system without general consensus from medical professional associations and societies. Without such consensus, this illegal implementation of PA system will create new and additional very serious medical crises due to unlawful medical, educational, professional conflicts and safety issues in medical practice. Before considering the implementation of the PA system, there needs to be a convincing justification by solving the fundamental problems beforehand, such as the collapsed medical delivery system, protection and provision of optimal education program and training environment of trainees, burnout from excessive workloads of physicians with very low compensational system and poor conditions for working and education, etc.

Fever (body temperature above 38℃) is relatively common during the first few days after general anesthesia. Postoperative fever is usually caused by the inflammation induced by surgery and resolves spontaneously; however, it can be a manifestation of a serious complication such as malignant hyperthermia. We report a case of postoperative hyperthermia (body temperature > 40℃) that was refractory to conventional anti-pyretic measures and finally resolved with dantrolene administration.
Anesthesia, General* ; Dantrolene* ; Fever ; Humans ; Inflammation ; Malignant Hyperthermia* ; Postoperative Period