Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Internationally, the United States (U.S.) cites the highest cost burden of low back pain (LBP). The cost continues to rise, faster than the rate of inflation and overall growth of health expenditures. We performed a comprehensive literature review of peer-reviewed and non– peer-reviewed literature from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar for contemporary data on prevalence, cost, and projected future costs. Policymakers in the U.S. have long attempted to address the high-cost burden of LBP through limiting low-value services and early imaging. Despite these efforts, costs (~$40 billion; ~$2,000/patient/yr) continue to rise with increasing rates of unindicated imaging, high rates of surgery, and subsequent revision surgery without proper trial of non-pharmacologic measures and no corresponding reduction in LBP prevalence. Globally, the overall prevalence of LBP continues to rise largely secondary to a growing aging population. Cost containment methods should focus on careful and comprehensive clinical assessment of patients to better understand when more resource-intensive interventions are indicated.

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are widely used in Korea because of the increasing incidence of cardiocerebrovascular disease and the aging population. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures is an important clinical challenge. The clinical practice guidelines for this issue, developed by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, were published in 2020. However, new evidence on the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and direct anticoagulant management has emerged, and revised guidelines have been issued in the United States and Europe. Accordingly, the previous guidelines were revised. Cardiologists were part of the group that developed the guideline, and the recommendations went through a consensus-reaching process among international experts. This guideline presents 14 recommendations made based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology and was reviewed by multidisciplinary experts. These guidelines provide useful information that can assist endoscopists in the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic and elective therapeutic endoscopy. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, are widely used in Korea because of the increasing incidence of cardiocerebrovascular disease and the aging population. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures is an important clinical challenge. The clinical practice guidelines for this issue, developed by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, were published in 2020. However, new evidence on the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and direct anticoagulant management has emerged, and revised guidelines have been issued in the United States and Europe. Accordingly, the previous guidelines were revised. Cardiologists were part of the group that developed the guideline, and the recommendations went through a consensus-reaching process among international experts. This guideline presents 14 recommendations made based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology and was reviewed by multidisciplinary experts. These guidelines provide useful information that can assist endoscopists in the management of patients receiving antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic and elective therapeutic endoscopy. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Antithrombotic agents, including antiplatelet agent and anticoagulants are widely used in Korea due to increasing incidence of cardio-cerebrovascular disease and aging population. The management of patients using antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures is an important clinical challenge. Clinical practice guideline regarding this issue which was developed by the Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy was published in 2020. However, since then, new evidence has emerged for the use of dual antiplatelet therapy and direct anticoagulant management, and revised guidelines were issued in the US and Europe. Accordingly, the previous guidelines were revised, cardiologists also participated in the development group, and the recommendations went through a consensus process among international experts. This guideline presents 14 recommendations made according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology, and was reviewed by multidisciplinary experts. This guideline provides useful information that can assist endoscopists in the management of patients on antithrombotic agents who require diagnostic and elective therapeutic endoscopy. It will be revised as necessary to cover changes in technology, evidence, or other aspects of clinical practice.

Male infertility (MI) and male sexual dysfunction (MSD) can often coexist together due to various interplay factors such as psychosexual, sociocultural and relationship dynamics. The presence of each form of MSD can adversely impact male reproduction and treatment strategies will need to be individualized based on patients’ factors, local expertise, and geographical socioeconomic status. The Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine (APSSM) and the Asian Society of Men’s Health and Aging (ASMHA) aim to provide a consensus statement and practical set of clinical recommendations based on current evidence to guide clinicians in the management of MI and MSD within the Asia-Pacific (AP) region. A comprehensive, narrative review of the literature was performed to identify the various forms of MSD and their association with MI. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for the following English language articles under the following terms: “low libido”, “erectile dysfunction”, “ejaculatory dysfunction”, “premature ejaculation”, “retrograde ejaculation”, “delayed ejaculation”, “anejaculation”, and “orgasmic dysfunction” between January 2001 to June 2022 with emphasis on published guidelines endorsed by various organizations. This APSSM consensus committee panel evaluated and provided evidence-based recommendations on MI and clinically relevant MSD areas using a modified Delphi method by the panel and specific emphasis on locoregional socioeconomic-cultural issues relevant to the AP region. While variations exist in treatment strategies for managing MI and MSD due to geographical expertise, locoregional resources, and sociocultural factors, the panel agreed that comprehensive fertility evaluation with a multidisciplinary management approach to each MSD domain is recommended. It is important to address individual MI issues with an emphasis on improving spermatogenesis and facilitating reproductive avenues while at the same time, managing various MSD conditions with evidence-based treatments. All therapeutic options should be discussed and implemented based on the patient’s individual needs, beliefs and preferences while incorporating locoregional expertise and available resources.

Humans ; Mass Vaccination ; COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use* ; COVID-19/prevention & control* ; Immunity, Herd ; Vaccination