Objectives: We evaluated the impacts on health, nutritional status, and dietary intake of providing senior-friendly foods to community-dwelling elderly women in a rural area in Korea. Methods: A pretest–posttest nonequivalent control group design with repeated measures was conducted among 71 rural-dwelling elderly women. Changes in health indicators, nutritional status, and dietary intake were assessed at three time points: baseline, post-intervention, and two months after intervention. Results: Immediately after a three month intervention, significant differences were observed between the intervention and control groups in frailty score, Dysphagia Handicap Index, Mini Nutritional Assessment, social isolation, resilience, quality of life, and depression (P < 0.05). Significant group-by-time interaction effects were found for muscle mass, hemoglobin A1c, and energy, protein, and micronutrient intake, all of which showed significant improvements in the intervention group (P < 0.05). Conclusion Providing senior-friendly foods effectively improved physical and physiological health and emotional well-being among rural older adults. This intervention also contributed broadly to improved dietary intake. These findings provide empirical evidence to support the development of community-based integrated care models and tailored nutrition intervention programs for rural elderly populations in Korea.Trial Registration: Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0011666.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: South Korea is transitioning into a super-aged society, where inadequate dietary intake among community-dwelling older adults leads to frailty, chronic diseases, and diminished quality of life. This study assessed the effects of providing seniorfriendly foods on dietary intake and nutritional status, generating evidence to support foodbased interventions that promote healthy, independent living among older adults. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In total, 144 participants were enrolled, comprising 103 and 41 individuals in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Over a 3-mon intervention period, the control group continued receiving existing meal services from the local government (the Customized Care Service for Older Adults), while the intervention group received senior-friendly food packages instead. Data were collected at baseline, upon concluding the 12-week intervention, and at 8 weeks post-intervention. General characteristics, oral health status, Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA), Nutrition Quotient for Elderly, nutrient intake, and the Index of Nutritional Quality (INQ) were analyzed. RESULTS: The intervention group (mean age: 79.2 yrs) had 2.1 chronic diseases and 2.6 medications, and 86% resided alone. Compared with the control group, the intervention group exhibited significant improvements in MNA scores over time, as well as in the time × group interaction (F = 4.439, P = 0.013; F = 7.480, P < 0.001). Nutrient intake, including energy, carbohydrates, fats, dietary fiber, calcium, and cholesterol (time, group, group × time P < 0.001), also significantly differed. INQ analysis revealed substantial improvements in protein, iron, magnesium, and vitamin B2 . However, fat intake and certain INQ values declined at follow-up, and vitamin D intake remained low in both groups. CONCLUSION Senior-friendly food packages improve the nutritional status of communitydwelling older adults in the short term. To sustain these benefits and foster healthy, independent aging, establishing sustainable food support systems, implementing policy-level backing, and promoting the diversified development of senior-friendly food are imperative.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop pilot clinical skills assessment (CSA) modules for Korean medicine-specific procedures and to examine their preliminary appropriateness, perceived necessity, and feasibility as a foundation for future licensing-related assessment development. Methods: A participatory action research framework, supplemented by qualitative interviews, was used to develop 4 CSA modules—acupuncture, Chuna manual therapy, pulse diagnosis, and constitutional diagnosis—in collaboration with expert evaluators, students, and standardized patients. The modules were implemented as formative examinations for third-year Korean medicine students, after which semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain feedback on module content, implementation processes, and scoring procedures. Each module was also reviewed using the RUMBA checklist (Realistic, Understandable, Measurable, Behavioral, and Achievable), together with ratings of perceived necessity and feasibility for possible future use in licensing-related assessment. Interview data were analyzed inductively at the level of individual responses and then compared across modules and participant groups. Results: Qualitative analysis yielded 3 themes: content and scoring criteria, physical environment or simulators, and education or training. Participants emphasized the need to make key aspects of performance more observable, improve authenticity through simulators or task trainers, and strengthen the capacity of scoring systems to distinguish between levels of student performance. Across all modules, mean RUMBA scores were high in the understandable, behavioral, and achievable domains, whereas measurability was more problematic, especially for pulse diagnosis. Conclusion These pilot findings clarify both the strengths and the limitations of Korean medicine-specific CSA modules. The modules received favorable ratings for understandability and achievability, whereas lower ratings for measurability and realism identified priorities for refinement before wider use. This study provides preliminary guidance for the continued development and broader evaluation of Korean medicine-specific performance assessments.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess prognostic factors associated with combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and to predict 5-year survival based on these factors. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent definitive hepatectomy from 2006 to 2022 at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria involved a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of cHCC-CCA. Results: A total of 80 patients with diagnosed cHCC-CCA were included in the analysis. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 months, while distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), hepatic progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were 50.8, 21.5, and 85.1 months, respectively. In 52 cases of recurrence, intrahepatic recurrence was the most common initial recurrence (34/52), with distant metastasis in 17 cases. Factors associated with poor DMFS included tumor necrosis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and histologic compact type. Postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9, tumor necrosis, LVI, and close/positive margin were associated with poor OS. LVI emerged as a key factor affecting both DMFS and OS, with a 5-year OS of 93.3% for patients without LVI compared to 35.8% with LVI. Based on these factors, a nomogram predicting 3-year and 5-year DMFS and OS was developed, demonstrating high concordance with actual survival in the cohort (Harrell C-index 0.809 for OS, 0.801 for DMFS, respectively). Conclusion The prognosis of cHCC-CCA is notably poor when combined with LVI. Given the significant impact of adverse features, accurate outcome prediction is crucial. Moreover, consideration of adjuvant therapy may be warranted for patients exhibiting poor survival and increased risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to assess prognostic factors associated with combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and to predict 5-year survival based on these factors. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent definitive hepatectomy from 2006 to 2022 at a single institution was retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria involved a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of cHCC-CCA. Results: A total of 80 patients with diagnosed cHCC-CCA were included in the analysis. The median progression-free survival was 15.6 months, while distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), hepatic progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS) were 50.8, 21.5, and 85.1 months, respectively. In 52 cases of recurrence, intrahepatic recurrence was the most common initial recurrence (34/52), with distant metastasis in 17 cases. Factors associated with poor DMFS included tumor necrosis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), perineural invasion, and histologic compact type. Postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9, tumor necrosis, LVI, and close/positive margin were associated with poor OS. LVI emerged as a key factor affecting both DMFS and OS, with a 5-year OS of 93.3% for patients without LVI compared to 35.8% with LVI. Based on these factors, a nomogram predicting 3-year and 5-year DMFS and OS was developed, demonstrating high concordance with actual survival in the cohort (Harrell C-index 0.809 for OS, 0.801 for DMFS, respectively). Conclusion The prognosis of cHCC-CCA is notably poor when combined with LVI. Given the significant impact of adverse features, accurate outcome prediction is crucial. Moreover, consideration of adjuvant therapy may be warranted for patients exhibiting poor survival and increased risk of local recurrence or distant metastasis.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the wound cosmesis of a single-incision approach on scar assessment after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Methods: This study included 32 patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and 61 patients undergoing multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for colon cancer at 3 tertiary referral hospitals between September 2011 and December 2019. We modified and applied the Korean version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) to assess cosmetic outcomes. To assess the interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient values for the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), the surgeons evaluated 5 images of postoperative scars. Results: No significant differences were observed in the time before the return of normal bowel function, time to sips of water and soft diet initiation, length of in-hospital stay, and postoperative complication rate. The SPLS group had a shorter total incision length than the MPLS group. The POSAS favored the SPLS approach, revealing significant differences in the Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS), OSAS, and overall scores. The SPLS approach was an independent factor influencing the POSAS, PSAS, and OSAS scores. Eleven colorectal surgeons had a significantly substantial intraclass coefficient. Conclusion The cosmetic outcomes of SPLS as assessed by the patients and surgeons were superior to those of MPLS in colon cancer. Reducing the number of ports is an independent factor affecting scar assessment by patients and observers.