Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a prevalent chronic condition among Korean adults. Dietary management, particularly sodium reduction, plays an important role in controlling hypertension. Nutrition labels may help individuals make healthier food choices, but their actual use and relationship with dietary intake among Korean adults with hypertension remain insufficiently understood.This study examined the awareness and the use of nutrition labels and assessed their association with the nutrient intake, with a focus on checking sodium information on nutrition labels among Korean adults with hypertension. The participants were 4,692 adults aged 35 years or older with hypertension selected from the 2022~2024 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Awareness, use, and the self-reported influence of nutrition labels on food choice were assessed. The nutrient intake was estimated from 24-hour dietary recall data. All analyses accounted for the complex survey design and were adjusted for age, sex, education level, income, and total energy intake. Overall, 66.5% of participants were aware of the nutrition labels, but only 32.8% used the labels. Among label users, 78.1% reported that labels influenced food choices. The nutrients most frequently checked were energy (23.1%) and sugar (22.7%), whereas sodium received relatively less attention (11.6%). No significant differences were observed in the sodium intake or most other nutrient intakes depending on whether sodium information on nutrition labels was checked. These findings suggest that nutrition label use remains limited, and policy-level strategies and targeted nutrition education interventions are needed to promote sodium reduction among adults with hypertension.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Purpose: This study examined the nutritional status and Korean Healthy Eating Index (KHEI) scores pre- and post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in elderly men and women living in rural areas. Methods: The participants were 1,747 rural elderly people aged 65 or older who participated in the nutritional survey of the 2018–2021 Korea National Health and Nutrition Survey. The nutrient intake was estimated from a 24-hour recall. Results: Following the COVID pandemic, the intake of fat, saturated fatty acids, and sodium increased in elderly men and women, whereas the intake of thiamine decreased. In elderly men, the intake of protein, niacin, and vitamin D decreased, but the sugar intake increased.In elderly women, the cholesterol intake increased. The KHEI score was significantly lower in rural elderly men and women after the pandemic than before (male: 62.60 ± 0.56 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.76 ± 0.75 for the pre-COVID-19, p < 0.05; female: 64.07 ± 0.80 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.47 ± 0.62 for the post-COVID-19, p < 0.001). Regarding the KHEI component, in men, the intake of meat, fish, and legumes, all sources of protein, decreased significantly after the COVID-19 pandemic. In women, the total food intake and the intake of breakfast decreased significantly after the pandemic. In the moderation components, men were unable to limit their total sugar and sodium intake, while women were unable to control their saturated fatty acids and sodium intake. Furthermore, considering the total KHEI score, both elderly men and women had decreased values in the moderation and adequacy components following COVID-19. Conclusion These results provide foundational data for elderly nutrition policies or educational programs targeting the elderly population in rural areas in similar pandemic situations in the future.

Purpose: This study examined the nutritional status and Korean Healthy Eating Index (KHEI) scores pre- and post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in elderly men and women living in rural areas. Methods: The participants were 1,747 rural elderly people aged 65 or older who participated in the nutritional survey of the 2018–2021 Korea National Health and Nutrition Survey. The nutrient intake was estimated from a 24-hour recall. Results: Following the COVID pandemic, the intake of fat, saturated fatty acids, and sodium increased in elderly men and women, whereas the intake of thiamine decreased. In elderly men, the intake of protein, niacin, and vitamin D decreased, but the sugar intake increased.In elderly women, the cholesterol intake increased. The KHEI score was significantly lower in rural elderly men and women after the pandemic than before (male: 62.60 ± 0.56 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.76 ± 0.75 for the pre-COVID-19, p < 0.05; female: 64.07 ± 0.80 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.47 ± 0.62 for the post-COVID-19, p < 0.001). Regarding the KHEI component, in men, the intake of meat, fish, and legumes, all sources of protein, decreased significantly after the COVID-19 pandemic. In women, the total food intake and the intake of breakfast decreased significantly after the pandemic. In the moderation components, men were unable to limit their total sugar and sodium intake, while women were unable to control their saturated fatty acids and sodium intake. Furthermore, considering the total KHEI score, both elderly men and women had decreased values in the moderation and adequacy components following COVID-19. Conclusion These results provide foundational data for elderly nutrition policies or educational programs targeting the elderly population in rural areas in similar pandemic situations in the future.

Purpose: This study examined the nutritional status and Korean Healthy Eating Index (KHEI) scores pre- and post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in elderly men and women living in rural areas. Methods: The participants were 1,747 rural elderly people aged 65 or older who participated in the nutritional survey of the 2018–2021 Korea National Health and Nutrition Survey. The nutrient intake was estimated from a 24-hour recall. Results: Following the COVID pandemic, the intake of fat, saturated fatty acids, and sodium increased in elderly men and women, whereas the intake of thiamine decreased. In elderly men, the intake of protein, niacin, and vitamin D decreased, but the sugar intake increased.In elderly women, the cholesterol intake increased. The KHEI score was significantly lower in rural elderly men and women after the pandemic than before (male: 62.60 ± 0.56 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.76 ± 0.75 for the pre-COVID-19, p < 0.05; female: 64.07 ± 0.80 for the post-COVID-19 and 64.47 ± 0.62 for the post-COVID-19, p < 0.001). Regarding the KHEI component, in men, the intake of meat, fish, and legumes, all sources of protein, decreased significantly after the COVID-19 pandemic. In women, the total food intake and the intake of breakfast decreased significantly after the pandemic. In the moderation components, men were unable to limit their total sugar and sodium intake, while women were unable to control their saturated fatty acids and sodium intake. Furthermore, considering the total KHEI score, both elderly men and women had decreased values in the moderation and adequacy components following COVID-19. Conclusion These results provide foundational data for elderly nutrition policies or educational programs targeting the elderly population in rural areas in similar pandemic situations in the future.

OBJECTIVES: We estimated the population prevalence of antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including unreported infections, through a Korea Seroprevalence Study of Monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Retention and Transmission (K-SEROSMART) in 258 communities throughout Korea. METHODS: In August 2022, a survey was conducted among 10,000 household members aged 5 years and older, in households selected through two stage probability random sampling. During face-to-face household interviews, participants self-reported their health status, COVID-19 diagnosis and vaccination history, and general characteristics. Subsequently, participants visited a community health center or medical clinic for blood sampling. Blood samples were analyzed for the presence of antibodies to spike proteins (anti-S) and antibodies to nucleocapsid proteins (anti-N) SARS-CoV-2 proteins using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. To estimate the population prevalence, the PROC SURVEYMEANS statistical procedure was employed, with weighting to reflect demographic data from July 2022. RESULTS: In total, 9,945 individuals from 5,041 households were surveyed across 258 communities, representing all basic local governments in Korea. The overall population-adjusted prevalence rates of anti-S and anti-N were 97.6% and 57.1%, respectively. Since the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency has reported a cumulative incidence of confirmed cases of 37.8% through July 31, 2022, the proportion of unreported infections among all COVID-19 infection was suggested to be 33.9%. CONCLUSIONS The K-SEROSMART represents the first nationwide, community-based seroepidemiologic survey of COVID-19, confirming that most individuals possess antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and that a significant number of unreported cases existed. Furthermore, this study lays the foundation for a surveillance system to continuously monitor transmission at the community level and the response to COVID-19.