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.

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: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

Background: The development of frailty at hospital discharge affects the clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors who had no frailty before hospitalization. We aimed to describe the prevalence of new frailty using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and evaluate its associated factors in patients with severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty before hospitalization. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of clinical data from a nationwide retrospective cohort collected from 22 hospitals between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2021. The patients were at least 19 years old and survived until discharge after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of severe COVID-19. Development of new frailty was defined as a CFS score ≥5 at hospital discharge. Results: Among 669 severe COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing frailty admitted to the ICU, the mean age was 65.2±12.8 years, 62.5% were male, and 50.2% received mechanical ventilation (MV). The mean CFS score at admission was 2.4±0.9, and new frailty developed in 27.8% (186/483). In multivariate analysis, older age, cardiovascular disease, CFS score of 3–4 before hospitalization, increased C-reactive protein level, longer duration of corticosteroid treatment, and use of MV and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were identified as factors associated with new-onset frailty. Conclusion Our study suggests that new frailty is not uncommon and is associated with diverse factors in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty.

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: Malnutrition exacerbates the prognosis of numerous diseases; however, its specific impact on severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes remains insufficiently explored. Methods: This multicenter study in Korea evaluated the nutritional status of 1,088 adults with severe COVID-19 using the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) based on serum albumin levels and body weight. The patients were categorized into two groups: GNRI >98 (no-risk) and GNRI ≤98 (risk). Propensity score matching, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables, was conducted. Results: Of the 1,088 patients, 642 (59%) were classified as at risk of malnutrition. Propensity score matching revealed significant disparities in hospital (34.3% vs. 19.4%, p<0.001) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (31.5% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001) between the groups. The risk group was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate in the multivariate Cox regression analyses following propensity score adjustment (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; p=0.001). Among the 670 elderly patients, 450 were at risk of malnutrition. Furthermore, the risk group demonstrated significantly higher hospital (52.1% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001) and ICU mortality rates (47.2% vs. 29.1%, p<0.001). The risk group was significantly associated with increased hospital mortality rates in the multivariate analyses following propensity score adjustment (HR, 1.66; p=0.001). Conclusion Malnutrition, as indicated by a low GNRI, was associated with increased mortality in patients with severe COVID-19. This effect was also observed in the elderly population. These findings underscore the critical importance of nutritional assessment and effective interventions for patients with severe COVID-19.

Background: The development of frailty at hospital discharge affects the clinical outcomes in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) survivors who had no frailty before hospitalization. We aimed to describe the prevalence of new frailty using the clinical frailty scale (CFS) and evaluate its associated factors in patients with severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty before hospitalization. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of clinical data from a nationwide retrospective cohort collected from 22 hospitals between January 1, 2020 and August 31, 2021. The patients were at least 19 years old and survived until discharge after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of severe COVID-19. Development of new frailty was defined as a CFS score ≥5 at hospital discharge. Results: Among 669 severe COVID-19 survivors without pre-existing frailty admitted to the ICU, the mean age was 65.2±12.8 years, 62.5% were male, and 50.2% received mechanical ventilation (MV). The mean CFS score at admission was 2.4±0.9, and new frailty developed in 27.8% (186/483). In multivariate analysis, older age, cardiovascular disease, CFS score of 3–4 before hospitalization, increased C-reactive protein level, longer duration of corticosteroid treatment, and use of MV and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were identified as factors associated with new-onset frailty. Conclusion Our study suggests that new frailty is not uncommon and is associated with diverse factors in survivors of severe COVID-19 without pre-existing frailty.

Background: The number of organ transplants in South Korea has increased, with a notable rise in living donor transplants. Ensuring their long-term health and well-being is critical to address potential complications and maintain the success of the transplant programs. Methods: A diverse advisory panel, including transplant experts and coordinators, was established to evaluate the follow-up care for living donors. The panel reviewed the results of a brief survey of donors regarding their donation experience, follow-up programs, guidelines, and policies from South Korea and other countries, aiming to identify best practices and recommend improvements. Results: The study found that follow-up care for living donors in South Korea is inconsistent and lacks standardization. Significant variability exists in follow-up practices across different institutions, and comprehensive data on donor health pre- and post-donation are scarce. The need for continuous, systematic follow-up, encompassing both medical and psychological support, is emphasized to ensure donor well-being. Conclusion Improving follow-up care for living donors is essential. Establishing a national registry and increasing donor advocacy teams are meaningful steps to enhance donor care, ensure long-term health, and maintain ethical standards in organ donation.