Trauma anesthesia demands a high level of expertise. In this context, anesthesiologists are required to manage complex physiology and rapidly evolving scenarios in critically injured patients, who often present profound hemodynamic instability. In addition to providing intraoperative anesthesia, trauma anesthesiologists serve as active resuscitationists and are key players in the trauma team from the moment of the patient’s arrival. General trauma resuscitation follows the ABCDE approach. The key areas of trauma anesthesia include airway management (A, airway), with rapid sequence induction and strategies for handling difficult airways; ventilation techniques (B, breathing) aimed at protecting the traumatized lungs under pressure; and hemodynamic resuscitation (C, circulation), which incorporates permissive hypotension, implementing massive transfusion protocols, and managing trauma-induced coagulopathy. Neuromonitoring and brain protection (D, disability) are crucial in cases of traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries, requiring precise blood pressure control and intracranial pressure monitoring. Advanced monitoring techniques (E, exposure), which include point-of-care ultrasound and invasive hemodynamic assessment, further enhance intraoperative decision-making. Above all, effective trauma anesthesia hinges on seamless interdisciplinary collaboration (F, force), with decision-making shared between anesthesiologists and trauma surgeons in high-risk surgeries. In this review, we highlight the pivotal role of trauma anesthesiologists in severe hemorrhage management, one of the most critical challenges in trauma resuscitation, and emphasize that an integrated, proactive approach is essential not only for improving immediate survival, but also for optimizing long-term recovery of the patient.

Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a frequent phenotype of BRCA-mutanttumors. Tumors with BRCAness may show characteristics of BRCA-mutant tumors and respond to similar treatments. Next-generation sequencing is an efficient and cost-effective method for simultaneously sequencing multiple cancer susceptibility genes, surpassing conventional Sanger testing. Methods: A total of 148 women with TNBC were recruited from December 2015 to November 2018, as part of a sub-analysis based on the PEARLY trial data. Of them, 103 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). The targeted genes related to hereditary cancers were sequenced using the 65-gene germline next-generation sequencing (gNGS) panel pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (P&LPs) were determined by Sanger sequencing. We examined the occurrence of pathologic complete remission (ypCR) in patients with P&LPs. Results: The patients’ median age was 47 years (range, 27–69 years). Twenty (13.7%) of 148 patients had P&LP in six genes, including BARD1 (n = 2), BRCA1 (n = 9), BRCA2 (n = 5), CHEK2 (n = 1), RAD51C (n = 1), and RAD51D (n = 2). Among the 103 patients with NCT, 43 (41.7%) achieved ypCR (P&LPs; 9 individuals vs. non-variants; 34 individuals). Among the 103 patients with NCT, 14 (9.3%) had P&LPs. Nine of 14 patients with P&LPs, including BARD1 (n = 2), BRCA1 (n = 4), BRCA2 (n = 1), RAD51C (n = 1), and RAD51D (n = 1), achieved ypCR, showing a trend toward statistical significance (p = 0.066). Conclusion Germline P&LP mutations in TNBC patients can be detected by gNGS. This panel test can identify BRCA and BRCAness mutations that may predict ypCR in TNBC.

Objectives: Lonely death is defined as “a person living in a state of social isolation, disconnected from family, relatives, and others, who dies from suicide, illness, or other causes”. This study investigated the characteristics of individuals who die alone in Korea. Methods: We constructed a database of lonely death cases by linking data from the Korea Crime Scene Investigation Unit of the Korea National Police Agency with National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) records. A descriptive analysis was performed to evaluate the demographics, underlying diseases, and healthcare utilization patterns among lonely death cases. Results: Among the 3122 individuals identified as lonely death cases, 2621 (84.0%) were male and 501 (16.0%) were female. The most common age group was 50-59 years (n=930, 29.8%). The NHIS covered 2161 individuals (69.2%), whereas 961 individuals (30.8%) were enrolled in Medical Aid (MA). The highest number of lonely deaths occurred in Seoul areas, with 1468 cases (47.0%). Mood disorders were diagnosed in 1020 individuals (32.7%), and various alcohol-related diseases, including alcoholic liver disease, were also observed. Outpatient visits increased leading up to death but declined in the final 3 months, while hospitalizations decreased and emergency room visits slightly increased. Conclusions Most lonely death cases involved male in their 50s, with a disproportionately high number of MA beneficiaries compared to the general population. Many of these individuals also experienced mental health issues or alcohol-related disorders. Preventing social isolation and strengthening social safety nets are critical to reducing the occurrence of lonely deaths.

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.

Objectives: Lonely death is defined as “a person living in a state of social isolation, disconnected from family, relatives, and others, who dies from suicide, illness, or other causes”. This study investigated the characteristics of individuals who die alone in Korea. Methods: We constructed a database of lonely death cases by linking data from the Korea Crime Scene Investigation Unit of the Korea National Police Agency with National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) records. A descriptive analysis was performed to evaluate the demographics, underlying diseases, and healthcare utilization patterns among lonely death cases. Results: Among the 3122 individuals identified as lonely death cases, 2621 (84.0%) were male and 501 (16.0%) were female. The most common age group was 50-59 years (n=930, 29.8%). The NHIS covered 2161 individuals (69.2%), whereas 961 individuals (30.8%) were enrolled in Medical Aid (MA). The highest number of lonely deaths occurred in Seoul areas, with 1468 cases (47.0%). Mood disorders were diagnosed in 1020 individuals (32.7%), and various alcohol-related diseases, including alcoholic liver disease, were also observed. Outpatient visits increased leading up to death but declined in the final 3 months, while hospitalizations decreased and emergency room visits slightly increased. Conclusions Most lonely death cases involved male in their 50s, with a disproportionately high number of MA beneficiaries compared to the general population. Many of these individuals also experienced mental health issues or alcohol-related disorders. Preventing social isolation and strengthening social safety nets are critical to reducing the occurrence of lonely deaths.

Objectives: Lonely death is defined as “a person living in a state of social isolation, disconnected from family, relatives, and others, who dies from suicide, illness, or other causes”. This study investigated the characteristics of individuals who die alone in Korea. Methods: We constructed a database of lonely death cases by linking data from the Korea Crime Scene Investigation Unit of the Korea National Police Agency with National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) records. A descriptive analysis was performed to evaluate the demographics, underlying diseases, and healthcare utilization patterns among lonely death cases. Results: Among the 3122 individuals identified as lonely death cases, 2621 (84.0%) were male and 501 (16.0%) were female. The most common age group was 50-59 years (n=930, 29.8%). The NHIS covered 2161 individuals (69.2%), whereas 961 individuals (30.8%) were enrolled in Medical Aid (MA). The highest number of lonely deaths occurred in Seoul areas, with 1468 cases (47.0%). Mood disorders were diagnosed in 1020 individuals (32.7%), and various alcohol-related diseases, including alcoholic liver disease, were also observed. Outpatient visits increased leading up to death but declined in the final 3 months, while hospitalizations decreased and emergency room visits slightly increased. Conclusions Most lonely death cases involved male in their 50s, with a disproportionately high number of MA beneficiaries compared to the general population. Many of these individuals also experienced mental health issues or alcohol-related disorders. Preventing social isolation and strengthening social safety nets are critical to reducing the occurrence of lonely deaths.

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.