Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in both Korea and worldwide. Since 2004, the Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer have been regularly updated, with the 4th edition published in 2022. The 4th edition was the result of a collaborative work by an interdisciplinary team, including experts in gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and guideline development methodology. The current guideline is the 5th version, an updated version of the 4th edition. In this guideline, 6 key questions (KQs) were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group, and 7 statements were developed, or revised, or discussed based on a systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and KoreaMed database. Over the past 2 years, there have been significant changes in systemic treatment, leading to major updates and revisions focused on this area.Additionally, minor modifications have been made in other sections, incorporating recent research findings. The level of evidence and grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Key factors for recommendation included the level of evidence, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability. The working group reviewed and discussed the recommendations to reach a consensus. The structure of this guideline remains similar to the 2022 version.Earlier sections cover general considerations, such as screening, diagnosis, and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. In the latter sections, statements are provided for each KQ based on clinical evidence, with flowcharts supporting these statements through meta-analysis and references. This multidisciplinary, evidence-based gastric cancer guideline aims to support clinicians in providing optimal care for gastric cancer patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula and neck according to the classification of forward head posture (FHP), round shoulder posture (RSP) and forward head with round shoulder posture (FHRSP). Methods: Scapular alignment, muscle strength around the scapula, and neck strength were measured according to the FHP and RSP alignment classification for male college students. Scapular alignment was confirmed by measuring acromial depression, scapular lateral displacement, and scapular acromion distance. Muscle strength was measured during isometric contraction of upper trapezius (UT), middle trapezius (MT), lower trapezius (LT), and neck muscles. Results: Acromial depression was significantly greater in the FHP (7.20±1.02 cm) than in the RSP group (5.60±1.26 cm) and FHRSP (5.26±1.75 cm) (p＜0.05). The strength of the UT was significantly greater in the FHRSP (1.12±0.12 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.87±0.19 N/BW), and the strength of the LT was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.04 N/BW) than in the FHP (0.15±0.03 N/BW) and RSP (0.15±0.04 N/BW) (p＜0.05). The LT:UT ratio was significantly greater in the control group (0.20±0.05) than in the FHRSP (0.15±0.02) (p＜0.05). Conclusion UT strength was higher in RSP subjects with scapular elevation accompanied by FHP than in those with FHP alone. And LT strength and the LT:UT ratio were higher in subjects withno abnormalities in postural alignment. We suggest that these results can serve as a reference for evaluation and intervention according to postural alignment in clinical practice.

Background: The exposome encompasses all factors people encounter through life, with the skin constantly exposed. While particulate matter (PM) and sleep deprivation are known to contribute to barrier dysfunction, their combined effects remain unclear. Objective: To evaluate the independent and combined effects of PM exposure and short-term sleep deprivation on skin barrier function. Methods: Forty healthy Korean women (aged 24–58 years) were enrolled in this study. Forearms were divided into 4 sites: control, PM exposure, sleep deprivation, and PM plus sleep deprivation. Parameters such as trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), hydration, elasticity, roughness, and redness were measured at baseline and post-exposure. RNA sequencing and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction were conducted on tape-stripped skin samples. Results: PM exposure significantly increased TEWL (+25.59%, p<0.01), roughness (+21.9%, p<0.01), and redness (+13.7%, p<0.0001) while reducing elasticity (−3.98%, p<0.01). Sleep deprivation modestly reduced elasticity (−1.39%, p<0.05) without affecting other parameters.Combined PM and sleep deprivation did not further exacerbate barrier dysfunction compared to PM alone. RNA sequencing revealed reduced FLG and LORICRIN expression and upregulated endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress markers (HSP90B1, CANX) in both PM and sleep deprivation conditions. Conclusion PM exposure impaired skin barrier function, while short-term sleep deprivation alone did not significantly affect the barrier, either independently or in combination with PM.However, it was observed that the sleep deprivation-only, while not directly causing barrier damage, induced changes in ER stress-related gene expression in tape-stripped skin samples, like the PM exposure-only. This suggests that such signaling pathways could potentially exacerbate skin barrier deterioration.