Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

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 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 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 accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

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 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.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence of dry eye syndrome (DES) in children under 18 years old before and during the COVID-19 pandemic using nationwide population-based cohort analysis. Methods: This study utilized the database provided by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency and the Korean National Health Insurance Service. We used claims-based data for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between October 8, 2020, and December 31, 2021, and those without a diagnosis of COVID-19. DES cases were defined as having at least one diagnosis of H0411 or H1621 based on the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the hazard ratio for DES between the COVID-19 season and the non–COVID-19 season. Results: A total of 198,486 individuals from the COVID-19 season cohort and 211,828 individuals from the non–COVID-19 season cohort were included in the study. There were no differences in characteristics between the COVID-19 season cohort and the non–COVID-19 season cohort (all standardized mean difference, <0.1). The cumulative incidence of DES during the COVID-19 season was significantly higher than that during the non–COVID-19 season. The COVID-19 season DES incidence rate was 6,419.64 per 100,000 person-years and non–COVID-19 season DES incidence rate was 5,804.88 per 100,000 person-years. In addition, children aged 13 to 18 years, female sex, those living in metropolitan areas, and those with diabetes mellitus had a higher risk of DES. Conclusions The prevalence of diagnosed DES in children increased during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previous years. Children aged 13 to 18 years, female sex, those living in metropolitan areas, and those with diabetes mellitus had a higher risk of DES. Further studies are needed to directly analyze the potential factors associated with the increased prevalence of DES.