Background and Objectives: In chronic heart failure (HF), natriuretic peptide (NP) levels are higher in atrial fibrillation (AF) compared to sinus rhythm (SR). However, due to the loss of atrial contraction, AF patients are prone to hemodynamic decompensation at earlier stages.Since NP levels reflect disease severity, acutely decompensated AF patients may exhibit lower NP levels compared to SR patients, who retain greater hemodynamic reserve. Methods: We analyzed 5,048 patients with acute HF from the Korea Acute Heart Failure registry with available NP data. NP levels and echocardiographic parameters were compared between AF and SR patients. The association of NP levels with in-hospital and one-year mortality was also assessed according to cardiac rhythm. Results: Brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) were measured in 2,027 and 3,021 patients, respectively. NP levels were lower in AF than in SR (median BNP, 740 vs. 1,044 pg/mL; median NT-proBNP, 4,420 vs. 5,198 pg/mL), particularly in HF with reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction. A similar trend was observed regardless of HF onset or etiology. AF patients had smaller left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic diameter and larger left atrial size compared to SR patients. Higher NP tertiles were associated with increased in-hospital and one-year mortality in both groups. Conclusions In acute HF, NP levels are lower in AF than in SR. AF patients also exhibited smaller LV chamber sizes. Nevertheless, NP levels remain strong predictors of outcomes in both AF and SR patients.

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in South Korea, imposing substantial physical, emotional, and financial burdens on patients and society. Despite the high burden of symptom and complex care needs of HF patients, palliative care and hospice services remain underutilized in South Korea due to cultural, institutional, and knowledge-related barriers. This position statement from the Korean Society of Heart Failure emphasizes the need for integrating palliative and hospice care into HF management to improve quality of life and support holistic care for patients and their families. By clarifying the role of palliative care in HF and proposing practical referral criteria, this position statement aims to bridge the gap between HF and palliative care services in South Korea, ultimately improving patient-centered outcomes and aligning treatment with the goals and values of HF patients.

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.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

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.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

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.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Background and Objectives: The Korean Organ Transplant Registry (KOTRY) provided data for this third official report on adult heart transplantation (HT), including information from 709 recipients. Methods: Data from HTs performed at seven major centers in Korea between March 2014 and December 2020 were analyzed, focusing on immunosuppression, acute rejection, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), post-transplant survival, and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) usage. Results: The median ages of the recipients and donors were 56.0 and 43.0 years, respectively.Cardiomyopathy and ischemic heart disease were the most common preceding conditions for HT. A significant portion of patients underwent HT at waiting list status 1 and 0. In the multivariate analysis, a predicted heart mass mismatch was associated with a higher risk of 1-year mortality. Patients over 70 years old had a significantly increased risk of 6-year mortality. The risk of CAV was higher for male donors and donors older than 45 years. Acute rejection was more likely in patients with panel reactive antibody levels above 80%, while statin use was associated with a reduced risk. The employment of left ventricular assist device as a bridge to transplantation increased from 2.17% to 22.4%. Pre-transplant extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation was associated with worse post-transplant survival. Conclusions In this third KOTRY report, we analyzed changes in the characteristics of adult HT recipients and donors and their impact on post-transplant outcomes. The most notable discovery was the increased use of MCS before HT and their impact on post-transplant outcomes.