Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Methods: The UBE approach targeted the ventral part of the superior articular process in the transforaminal UBE setup, specifically for upper lumbar disc herniation, with an approach angle of approximately 30º on the axial plane. Intraoperative navigation was employed to improve puncture accuracy for this relatively unfamiliar surgical technique. Navigation-assisted transforaminal UBE lumbar discectomy was performed on four patients presenting with back or leg discomfort due to disc herniation at the L1–L2 or L2–L3 levels. Results: All patients experienced symptom relief and were discharged on postoperative day 2. Conclusions Transforaminal UBE lumbar discectomy is a viable therapeutic option for upper lumbar paracentral disc herniation, which is typically associated with poor prognosis. Integrating navigation integration into this novel approach enhances precision and safety.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Background: There are few safe effective ways to relieve osteoarthritis (OA) pain; as a result, off-label psychotropic drug prescriptions have increased worldwide. This study examined the change in psychotropic drug prescriptions for patients with OA from 2011 to 2020 using the Korean National Health Insurance Service dataset. Methods: The study population consisted of patients with hip or knee OA aged ≥ 65 years.Psychotropic drugs included opioids, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z-drugs), anti-epileptics, tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), typical antipsychotics, atypical antipsychotics, and anxiolytics. The prevalence and long-term (> 3 months) prescription rates of psychotropic drugs in OA patients were calculated. Results: The study included 1,821,158 patients with OA (mean age 71.7 years; 65.32% female).Of the cohort, 49% had comorbidities for which psychotropics were indicated. The prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions decreased from 58.2% to 52.0% in 2018 and then leveled off.The long-term prescription rate remained constant until 2018 and then increased slightly.The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were opioids and long- and short-acting benzodiazepines. The prescription rates of opioids and long-acting benzodiazepines decreased from 2011 to 2020. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of anti-epileptics and SNRIs increased, while the prescription rates of anti-epileptics, SSRIs, other antidepressants, and atypical psychotropics increased for those without such co-morbidities. The most commonly prescribed psychotropics were diazepam and alprazolam, excluding tramadol and tramadol–acetaminophen combination. For those with psychiatric co-morbidities, the prescription rates of gabapentin and fentanyl increased, while for those without such co-morbidities, the prescription rates of lorazepam, fentanyl, escitalopram and quetiapine increased. Conclusion A significant number of older Korean patients with OA were prescribed psychotropic drugs in the absence of comorbidities requiring such drugs, including drugs that have little effect on OA and unfavorable safety profiles in older adults.

Methods: The UBE approach targeted the ventral part of the superior articular process in the transforaminal UBE setup, specifically for upper lumbar disc herniation, with an approach angle of approximately 30º on the axial plane. Intraoperative navigation was employed to improve puncture accuracy for this relatively unfamiliar surgical technique. Navigation-assisted transforaminal UBE lumbar discectomy was performed on four patients presenting with back or leg discomfort due to disc herniation at the L1–L2 or L2–L3 levels. Results: All patients experienced symptom relief and were discharged on postoperative day 2. Conclusions Transforaminal UBE lumbar discectomy is a viable therapeutic option for upper lumbar paracentral disc herniation, which is typically associated with poor prognosis. Integrating navigation integration into this novel approach enhances precision and safety.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate a new method for the five times sit to stand test (FTSST), crucial for addressing frailty in an aging population. It utilizes a smart insole for plantar pressure analysis and a marker-less motion capture device for head height analysis. Materials and Methods: Thirty-five participants aged 50 years or older underwent FTSST assessment using three methods: manual measurement with a stopwatch (FTSST-M), plantar pressure analysis with smart insoles (FTSST-P), and head height analysis with a marker-less motion capture device (FTSST-H). Simultaneous measurements using three methods were done. Correlation between results of these methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and κ coefficient. Comprehensive clinical examinations were conducted with ethical approval. Results: Participants’ mean scores for FTSST-M, FTSST-P, and FTSST-H were 2.43±1.20, 2.43±1.29, and 2.37±1.31, respectively. Correlations of the times and corresponding scores between FTSST-P and FTSST-M, as well as FTSST-H and FTSST-M, exceeded 0.9 (ICC and κ coefficients, p<0.001). Using an FTSST score of 3 or less to indicate vulnerability, the κ value for vulnerability classification between two measurements was 0.886 (p<0.001). Conclusion This study showed strong correlation between FTSST results using smart insoles and marker-less motion capture, compared to conventional methods. These findings highlight the potential of these technologies for precise FTSST measurements, offering convenience and cost-effectiveness. Simultaneous use of these devices enables diverse analyses, enhancing our understanding of frailty.