Background/Aims: Endoscopic anti-reflux therapy is a therapeutic option for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), providing durable effects. However, clinical data from Korea remain limited. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes of endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy in Korean patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 71 patients with GERD who underwent Stretta therapy at 2 tertiary hospitals in Korea between November 2015 and July 2021. Clinical outcomes, including patient satisfaction, medication cessation or reduction, and complications, were evaluated. Pre- and post-procedural esophageal manometry and 24-hour pH monitoring test results were also analyzed. Results: Patient satisfaction rates at 1, 6, and 12 months post-procedure were 54.7% (35/64), 70.0% (28/40), and 75.0% (21/28), respectively. Medication cessation or reduction was achieved in 31.2% (20/64) at 1 month, 70.0% (28/40) at 6 months, and 67.9% (19/28) at 12 months. Esophageal manometry (n = 21) showed no significant changes in mean lower esophageal sphincter pressure (18.7 mmHg [2.5-52.9] vs 17.4 mmHg [0.0-43.0], P = 0.702) or mean integrated relaxation pressure (8.2 mmHg [0.0-28.0] vs 10.1 mmHg [0.0-31.0], P = 0.840). The 24-hour pH monitoring (n = 18) demonstrated a nonsignificant decrease in acid exposure time (pH < 4) from 2.3% (0.0-8.4) to 1.6% (0.0-7.3) (P = 0.182). Similarly, the DeMeester score decreased non-significantly from 8.4 (0.8-27.7) to 6.6 (0.8-21.8) (P = 0.352). No procedure-related complications occurred. Conclusion Endoscopic radiofrequency Stretta therapy appears to be a safe treatment option for GERD and may provide favorable patient satisfaction and medication reduction.

Legal risks and liability issues in medical practice serve as a primary catalyst for the current collapse of essential healthcare services in Korea. Currently, medical disputes in Korea are disproportionately focused on criminal prosecutions and high-damages civil litigation. This punitive approach fosters a culture of concealment, encourages defensive medicine, and accelerates the exodus of medical professionals from essential fields. Ultimately, this cycle deprives the system of opportunities for improvement and poses a significant threat to patient safety. In contrast, many advanced nations have adopted principles of “Just Culture” and “Safe Space,” prioritizing non-punitive reporting and systemic root-cause analysis over individual retribution. To address these issues, this paper proposes four key strategies: First, the establishment of an independent “Patient Safety Investigation Agency” to objectively investigate incidents and identify systemic flaws. Second, a transition from criminal punishment to licensing board-led management, focusing on re-education and counseling to maintain quality of care. Third, the enactment of “Apology Laws” to ensure that expressions of regret or apologies cannot be used as legal evidence of liability, thereby fostering trust and psychological recovery. Finally, the creation of a “Patient Safety Fund” to provide prompt and sufficient public compensation to victims regardless of proven negligence. In conclusion, it is imperative to shift the paradigm by defining medical accidents as “system failures” rather than individual faults. Strengthening the social safety net will encourage medical professionals to return to essential care and build a sustainable healthcare environment centered on patient safety.

The South Korean healthcare system has achieved rapid quantitative growth; however, it continues to face critical challenges in ensuring the fundamental right to health of its citizens. From the perspective of healthcare consumers and civil society, this article identifies structural problems such as imbalances in medical accessibility, instability in essential and emergency care, and the limited participation of consumers in healthcare policy-making. Although the constitution stipulates the state’s responsibility to protect public health, current healthcare policies often prioritize administrative efficiency and provider-centered interests over patient experiences and health outcomes. In particular, this article argues that these challenges are closely related to the inadequate functioning of an accountable healthcare management framework. Structural failures in essential care, workforce shortages, and regional disparities are insufficiently monitored and addressed at the system level, resulting in responsibilities being blurred or shifted to individual healthcare providers. Consequently, the risks and burdens arising from systemic weaknesses are ultimately borne by citizens. To address these issues, this article emphasizes two major shifts. First, meaningful consumer participation must be institutionalized within healthcare governance to strengthen accountability, transparency, and responsiveness. Second, family medicine and primary care should be reinforced as the cornerstone of a sustainable, community-based healthcare system that ensures continuity of care, prevention, and chronic disease management. Re-establishing the healthcare system based on the right to health is not merely a technical adjustment, but a structural transformation toward a responsible and accountable system in which the state clearly assumes responsibility for monitoring, learning, and corrective action.

Korea’s healthcare system is at a critical juncture as rapid population aging, rising chronic disease burdens, and fragmented care expose the limits of a hospital-centered, fee-for-service model. Although policy discussions have long emphasized strengthening primary care and introducing a “family doctor” system, past reforms have focused mainly on expanding services or redefining professional roles, without establishing clear accountability, care continuity, or aligned payment mechanisms. Consequently, primary care remains weak and responsibility for comprehensive patient management is diffuse. This article argues that meaningful reform requires redefining the primary physician as an accountable manager of longitudinal, coordinated care within an integrated delivery and payment framework. Drawing on experiences from the United States, the United Kingdom, and several European countries, it identifies common features of successful primary care–oriented systems, including patient registration, team-based care, risk-adjusted payment, and explicit outcome accountability. Based on these insights, the authors propose a Korean primary physician model tailored to solo and small-group practices while fostering regional collaboration. Core elements include voluntary patient registration, multidisciplinary primary care teams, risk-stratified care management, regional care networks, and a mixed payment model combining per-member-per-month payments, shared savings, and performance-based incentives. The article emphasizes phased pilot testing focused on operational feasibility. Ultimately, transitioning to a primary care–centered system is presented as a strategic necessity for sustainability and improved care continuity.

The South Korean resident training system is currently at a critical turning point, facing structural crises characterized by excessive labor-intensive environments and deteriorating quality of education. Since the medical standoff in 2024, the limitations of relying on junior doctors’ labor for hospital operations have become increasingly apparent. This review examines the current status and problems of the resident training system, including long working hours exceeding Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) standards, lack of systematic competency-based education, and worsening regional and essential medical imbalances. By analyzing international cases from the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia, this article proposes four core strategies for reform: (1) establishing a sustainable working and educational environment through the expansion of hospitalist systems and legalizing physician assistant roles; (2) innovating the curriculum and evaluation systems based on entrustable professional activities and milestones; (3) implementing a network-based training model to bridge the gap between metropolitan and regional healthcare; and (4) securing stable financial support and strengthening governance through the establishment of an independent evaluation body (e.g., K-ACGME). Ultimately, reforming the training system is essential not only for the rights and professional growth of residents but also for ensuring patient safety and the long-term sustainability of the national healthcare system.

Recurrent difficulty securing emergency department (ED) acceptance and delayed interfacility transfer, often resulting in multiple sequential transfer attempts (“round-robin” hospital seeking), in the Republic of Korea reflect a patient safety failure across the emergency care continuum, spanning Emergency Medical Services from emergency calls and prehospital care to ED stabilization, definitive treatment, and secondary transfer. We argue that the governance split between the National Fire Agency–led prehospital response and the Ministry of Health and Welfare–led emergency medical system fragments accountability and data, undermining sustainable quality management. We describe a “double bind” in which clinicians face medico-legal risk regardless of acceptance decisions, distorting transfer behavior. We propose an outcome-linked Quality Improvement system—integrated metrics, interoperable data linkage, operational medical control, and routine feedback—to strengthen Continuity of Patient Care. This requires functional integration of the dual command structure; transferring ambulance service functions to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, or an equivalently strong joint-governance model, should be evaluated. Regionally, responsibility-based systems should be implemented through councils that set transfer principles and resource allocation, supported by stable financing and performance review, with the regional emergency medical situation room providing medical control and real-time coordination. For mass-casualty incidents, preparedness should align standardized triage, integrated command and communication, training, and after-action review. Legal reform is a necessary starting point, but trust and sustained patient safety depend more on cultivating a learning-oriented safety culture grounded in patient experience and public deliberation throughout policy design and implementation.

South Korea’s current healthcare system stands at a critical crossroads that will determine whether it can progress in a better direction over the next decade. Behind the relatively stable level of population health that has been maintained until now, it has become clear that the deterioration of patient experiences, the risk of collapse in critical emergency medical services, the burnout of healthcare providers, and the crisis in the sustainability of healthcare finances have all accumulated simultaneously. This crisis can no longer be overcome by partial fixes or short-term measures alone. The answer to what needs to change first must begin with a reaffirmation of what the healthcare system should aim for. Ultimately, what needs to be changed now is not an individual policy, but the criteria and priorities through which we view healthcare. The focus must shift from what to provide more of, to questioning what holds greater social value. If such a shift does not begin now, in ten years we won’t face a better healthcare system, but care enmeshed in a deeper crisis. Now is precisely the time to fundamentally define the direction of the healthcare system.

Purpose: Current guidelines recommend vaccination at least 2 weeks before chemotherapy initiation to optimize the immune response despite limited evidence. Our previous study indicated no differences in short-term immune response for the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) according to the vaccination timing. This study aims to investigate the long-term efficacy of PCV13 and clinical factors associated with the respective antibody response. Materials and Methods: Patients with gastric or colorectal cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled and divided into two groups: vaccinated 2 weeks before chemotherapy (arm A) and vaccinated concurrently with chemotherapy (arm B). Serum samples were collected before vaccination and in one month, 3 years, and 5 years. Immune responses were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and multiplex opsonophagocytosis assay. Results: Including 63 patients, both groups showed an initial increase in the geometric mean titers of opsonophagocytic activity and the geometric mean concentrations of serotype-specific IgG levels after one month, followed by a decline at 3 and 5 years, particularly for serotypes 1, 14, 18C, and 19A. Despite the decline, global protection was maintained for 5 years, although global response decreased. The two arms did not show significant differences in immunogenicity nor in factors such as vaccination timing, age, cancer type, or chemotherapy regimen. Conclusion Vaccination timing is not a significant factor for the immunogenicity of PCV13 in cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. Global protection against pneumococcal infection was sustained for > 5 years, and global response remained in over half of patients.

Purpose: Radiotherapy (RT) remains a cornerstone of curative treatment for localized and locally advanced prostate cancer. However, dose escalation to improve tumor control is often constrained by the proximity of the rectum, which increases the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary toxicities. Biodegradable rectal spacers inserted between the prostate and rectum have emerged as an effective approach to reduce rectal radiation exposure. This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on indications, contraindications, procedural standards, and clinical management for biodegradable rectal spacer insertion during prostate cancer RT. Materials and Methods: This guideline was developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel through a systematic review of the literature, analysis of international guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology, American Society for Radiation Oncology), and expert consensus among radiation oncologists, radiologists, and urologists with clinical experience in spacer insertion. The strength of each recommendation and the level of evidence were classified according to the modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Results: Spacer insertion is conditionally recommended (Grade C, Level I) for patients receiving definitive external-beam RT without rectal invasion. It reduces the high-dose rectal irradiation volume (V70–75) by >50%, decreases acute GI toxicity, and helps maintain bowel-related quality of life. However, the benefit for late severe toxicity (grade 2 or higher) remains debated in recent meta-analyses. Contraindications include rectal invasion, anatomical inaccessibility, infection, and material hypersensitivity. Procedures should be performed under local anesthesia in a sterile environment by trained physicians. Short-course antibiotics and simulator-based training, including completion of multiple supervised cases, are advised. Conclusion Biodegradable rectal spacer insertion is clinically validated and effective in reducing acute rectal toxicity. Although pivotal trials demonstrated a favorable procedural safety profile, real-world postmarket data include reports of rare but severe procedural complications. This guideline provides standardized recommendations tailored to Korean clinical practice while remaining consistent with international standards, emphasizing the importance of operator training and careful patient selection.

Background: With the aging population and advancements in medical care worldwide, the number of older patients with end-stage kidney disease continues to rise. This study aimed to identify factors associated with osteoporosis and osteopenia in older patients undergoing incident hemodialysis and assess their impact on mortality. Methods: We analyzed a large multicenter retrospective cohort of patients aged ≥70 years undergoing incident hemodialysis to identify factors associated with osteoporosis using logistic regression analysis and to assess the association of death with osteoporosis and osteopenia using Cox multivariable analysis. Results: Among 710 patients, 39.0% and 19.6% had osteoporosis and osteopenia, respectively. Osteoporosis was significantly associated with female sex, a history of fractures, and the absence of phosphate binder use. During a median follow-up of 36.8 months, 348 participants (58.8%) died. Mortality rates were the highest in the osteoporosis group (79.8%), followed by the osteopenia (77.2%) and normal bone mineral density (BMD) groups (35.2%). Cox regression analysis revealed that even after adjusting for covariates, the osteoporosis group was significantly associated with a higher mortality risk than the normal BMD group. Osteoporosis at the start of hemodialysis was significantly associated with higher mortality. Conclusion We should consider the importance of bone health in patients undergoing incident hemodialysis and pay attention to the use of phosphate binders and fracture prevention.