Background: and Purpose: Tailored physical exercise interventions have the potential to promote cognitive health in older adults and offer significant advantages for those more vulnerable to decline. The specific relationship between physical fitness and cognition among the elderly has not been clearly established. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the relationship between physical fitness and cognitive function in older Korean adults. Methods: Eighty-four community-dwelling older adults (mean age: 70.7±5.3 years; 81.0% female) completed a standardized physical fitness battery assessing handgrip strength, sit-and-reach, 30-second sit-to-stand, 2-minute stationary march, 3-m sit-walk-and-return, figure-8-walk, and T-wall response time. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS). Descriptive statistics, partial correlation analyses, and stepwise multiple linear regression were conducted. Results: Slower T-wall response time was significantly correlated with lower RBANS total index, immediate memory, and delayed memory scores. In regression models, slower T-wall response time was independently associated with lower RBANS total index (β=−0.234, p=0.026) and delayed memory scores (β=−0.295, p=0.029). The regression model for immediate memory was not statistically significant overall; therefore, no predictive conclusion was drawn for this domain. Higher education showed a significant positive association with cognitive performance. Conclusions Coordination, as measured by T-wall response time, emerged as the only physical fitness component consistently associated with cognitive performance in older adults. Coordination-related fitness may be an important correlate of cognitive function in older adults and a promising target for future exercise interventions.

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.

Objective: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been prolonged, the pre-hospital screening test performed in hospitals has changed from polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to rapid antigen test (RAT). RAT has lower sensitivity than PCR, but a lower cost and shorter test time. In the hospital where this study was conducted, the preadmission COVID-19 test was changed from PCR to RAT on February 24, 2023. This study compared the efficacy of PCR and RAT as the pre-admission COVID-19 test. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study comparing two periods, 90 days from November 25, 2022 to February 23, 2023, and 90 days from February 28, 2023 to May 29, 2023. Patients hospitalized from the emergency medical center during these two periods were included. Binomial logistic regression was used to compare the emergency department length of stay (ED LOS) between the two groups (PCR vs. RAT). Logistic regression was used to compare the mortality. Results: Four thousand seven hundred and thirty-eight patients were admitted through the emergency room: 2,202 patients in the PCR group and 2,443 patients in the RAT group. No statistically significant differences in the characteristics and severity were observed between the two groups. The mean ED LOS of PCR 5.07 hours (interquartile range, 3.80-6.75) was longer than RAT 3.65 hours (interquartile range, 2.83-4.68) (P<0.001). Mortality was higher in PCR 8.9% than RAT 6.6% (P=0.005). Conclusion The study showed that ED LOS and mortality were reduced when using RAT rather than PCR as a preadmission COVID-19 test.

Background: A set of criteria for severity classification is essential in alopecia areata (AA). Currently, no guidelines are universally accepted for defining AA severity. Objective: This study aimed to establish a set of consensus criteria for classifying the severity of and identifying treatment refractoriness in AA. Methods: A preliminary draft of the definition for moderate-to-severe AA was crafted based on available evidence, and members of the Korean Hair Research Society (KHRS) subsequently endorsed the recommendation through an online survey. Results: In the first Delphi round, consensus was attained on 15 questions. After refining certain items in the second round, consensus was achieved on 23 out of 26 questions. The KHRS first defined AA severity using the severity of alopecia tool (SALT). SALT ≥50 was defined as severe, 20≤ SALT <50 as moderate, and SALT <20 as mild. Moderate AA was considered severe if it meets one or more of the following criteria: dermatology life quality index >10, presence of accompanying eyebrow or eyelash loss, positive hair loss activity, or treatment-refractory AA. Conclusion These consensus criteria can help clinicians accurately diagnose AA, provide appropriate treatment, and monitor its progression.

Background: Alopecia areata (AA) is characterized by hair loss on the scalp and body, significantly impacting patients’ quality of life based on its severity. Objective: This study aims to identify crucial factors influencing the perception of severe AA from the patients’ viewpoint. Methods: A web-based survey was conducted among AA patients attending dermatology departments at 21 university hospitals in Korea. The survey comprised 17 criteria, exploring both clinical characteristics of AA patients and subjective determinants of disease severity. Results: A total of 791 AA patients and their caregivers participated in the survey. Approximately 30% of respondents developed AA during childhood, with 43.5% experiencing chronic courses lasting over 3 years. Half of the participants exhibited more than 20% scalp hair loss, and 42% reported additional hair loss on other body parts, such as eyelashes and nose hair.Most respondents agreed that patients with ≥20% scalp hair loss should be categorized as having severe AA. They also identified longer disease duration, involvement of non-scalp body hair, treatment refractoriness, and social or mental impairment requiring medical intervention as factors indicating increased disease severity. Conclusion This survey underscores the significant impact of AA on patients’ quality of life and highlights existing unmet needs in current treatment modalities.

Background: More than half of acne patients have truncal acne on their chest, back, and shoulders. However, since most studies on acne have focused on the face, data on clinical characteristics and proper management for truncal acne are insufficient. Objective: To establish a Korean Acne Rosacea Society (KARS) consensus for experts’ perception and treatment patterns of truncal acne. Methods: We conducted two rounds of the Dephi technique to gather expert opinion and reach a consensus on truncal acne. The first round comprised 48 questionnaires focusing on various aspects such as epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and more, while second rounds consisted of 26 questionnaires. Results: A total of 36 dermatologists (36/38 KARS members, 94.7%) completed this survey. In the first-round survey, consensus was reached on 20 out of the 48 questions (41.7%). In the secondround questionnaire, consensus was achieved on 9 of the 26 questions (34.6%). The most unresponsive lesion to truncal acne treatment was scars (atrophic/hypertrophic). The most commonly used treatments for each non-inflammatory and inflammatory truncal acne lesions were selected to use topical retinoids (78.1% of the responders) and oral antibiotics (93.8% of the responders). Conclusion Our study has yielded valuable insights into the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment, and quality of life of patients with truncal acne. We anticipate that this study will inspire further comprehensive research for individuals with truncal acne.