With a rapidly aging population and increasing use of antiresorptive agents, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) represents a growing clinical challenge worldwide. To address the need for tailored clinical guidance, a multidisciplinary task force was convened. Five Korean academic societies—the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research, the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, the Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, the Korean Society of Osteoporosis, and the Korean Endocrine Society—collaborated to develop this position statement. The consensus was formulated through comprehensive reviews of literature, combined with three rounds of formal surveys to consolidate expert opinion on controversial topics. This position paper provides evidence-based clinical guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of MRONJ tailored to the Korean healthcare environment. The diagnostic criteria affirm the standard definition but add a provision for diagnosis based on clinical or radiographic evidence of necrotic bone, even if the traditional 8-week timeframe has not been met. The committee advocates for retaining Stage 0 in the staging system to emphasize early detection and preventive intervention. Key recommendations include prescriptive, drug-specific guidelines for prophylactic drug holidays (e.g., a 2-month pause for oral bisphosphonates; timing surgery 3-4 months after the last denosumab injection) to minimize MRONJ risk from dental procedures. This statement also provides a clear framework for therapeutic drug holidays in established MRONJ, carefully balancing the need for jaw healing against systemic fracture risk. For treatment, this statement advocates for early and active surgical intervention across all MRONJ stages, supported by evidence of superior long-term outcomes compared to conservative management.This position statement offers a unique, evidence-based Korean clinical practice guideline for managing MRONJ. It is intended to standardize care, reduce clinical confusion, and ultimately improve patient outcomes by providing a clear framework for decision-making.

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.

With a rapidly aging population and increasing use of antiresorptive agents, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) represents a growing clinical challenge worldwide. To address the need for tailored clinical guidance, a multidisciplinary task force was convened. Five Korean academic societies—the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research, the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, the Korean Society of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons, the Korean Osteoporosis Society, and the Korean Endocrine Society—collaborated to develop this position statement. The consensus was formulated through comprehensive reviews of literature, combined with three rounds of formal surveys to consolidate expert opinion on controversial topics. This position paper provides evidence-based clinical guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of MRONJ tailored to the Korean healthcare environment. The diagnostic criteria affirm the standard definition but add a provision for diagnosis based on clinical or radiographic evidence of necrotic bone, even if the traditional 8-week timeframe has not been met. The committee advocates for retaining stage 0 in the staging system to emphasize early detection and preventive intervention. Key recommendations include prescriptive, drug-specific guidelines for prophylactic drug holidays (e.g., a 2-month pause for oral bisphosphonates; timing surgery 3 to 4 months after the last denosumab injection) to minimize MRONJ risk from dental procedures. This statement also provides a clear framework for therapeutic drug holidays in established MRONJ, carefully balancing the need for jaw healing against systemic fracture risk. For treatment, this statement advocates for early and active surgical intervention across all MRONJ stages, supported by evidence of superior long-term outcomes compared to conservative management. This position statement offers a unique, evidence-based Korean clinical practice guideline for managing MRONJ. It is intended to standardize care, reduce clinical confusion, and ultimately improve patient outcomes by providing a clear framework for decision-making.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Korea and the third leading cause of death from cancer. Treatment outcomes for colon cancer are steadily improving due to national health screening programs with advances in diagnostic methods, surgical techniques, and therapeutic agents.. The Korea Colon Cancer Multidisciplinary (KCCM) Committee intends to provide professionals who treat colon cancer with the most up-to-date, evidence-based practice guidelines to improve outcomes and help them make decisions that reflect their patients’ values and preferences. These guidelines have been established by consensus reached by the KCCM Guideline Committee based on a systematic literature review and evidence synthesis and by considering the national health insurance system in real clinical practice settings. Each recommendation is presented with a recommendation strength and level of evidence based on the consensus of the committee.

Colonoscopic polypectomy is effective in decreasing the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer (CRC). Premalignant polyps discovered during colonoscopy are associated with the risk of metachronous advanced neoplasia. Postpolypectomy surveillance is the most important method for managing advanced metachronous neoplasia. A more efficient and evidence-based guideline for postpolypectomy surveillance is required because of the limited medical resources and concerns regarding colonoscopy complications. In these consensus guidelines, an analytic approach was used to address all reliable evidence to interpret the predictors of CRC or advanced neoplasia during surveillance colonoscopy. The key recommendations state that the high-risk findings for metachronous CRC following polypectomy are as follows: adenoma ≥10 mm in size; 3 to 5 (or more) adenomas; tubulovillous or villous adenoma; adenoma containing high-grade dysplasia; traditional serrated adenoma; sessile serrated lesion containing any grade of dysplasia; serrated polyp of at least 10 mm in size; and 3 to 5 (or more) sessile serrated lesions. More studies are needed to fully comprehend the patients who are most likely to benefit from surveillance colonoscopy and the ideal surveillance interval to prevent metachronous CRC.

Objective: Early identification of COVID-19 in patients is important to prevent significant worsening of the disease. This study was undertaken to verify whether MEWS (Modified Early Warning Score), NEWS(National Early Warning Score), ROX index, and CURB-65, which are early diagnostic tools for severe respiratory diseases, could be applied to patients visiting the emergency room for COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective observational study included patients who visited an emergency medical center from September 1 to October 31, 2020, and from January 1 to February 28, 2021. Based on the vital signs and blood tests during the emergency room visit, severity evaluation tools and early diagnostic tools for severe cases were used and compared according to their area under the curve (AUC) values. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, while the secondary outcomes were intensive care unit admission rate and the need for mechanical ventilation based on these four tools (MEWS, NEWS, ROX index, and CURB-65). Results: A total of 667 patients were analyzed. No significant difference was determined between the non-survivor group and survivor group in the MEWS values (P=0.13), but statistically significant differences were observed for NEWS (5 vs. 1, P<0.05), CURB-65 (2 vs. 1, P<0.05), and ROX index (16.61 vs. 23.1, P<0.01). The AUC value of NEWS for death prediction indicated a good predictive power at 0.80, while that of MEWS showed a low predictive power at 0.57, which was statistically significant. Moreover, the AUC values of CURB-65 and ROX index did not differ significantly from values obtained for NEWS. Conclusion As early diagnostic tools for predicting death in COVID-19 patients, NEWS, ROX index, and CURB-65 showed excellent discrimination ability, whereas MEWS showed statistically and significantly lower discrimination ability.

Background/Aims: The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the management of colorectal cancer (CRC) may worse in elderly population, as almost all COVID-19 deaths occurred in the elderly patients. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on CRC management in the elderly population. Methods: The numbers of patients who underwent colonoscopy, who visited hospitals or operated for CRC in 2020 and 2021 (COVID-19 era) were compared with those in 2019, according to 3 age groups (≥70 years, 50–69 years, and ≤49 years), based on the nationwide, population-based database (2019–2021) in South Korea. Results: The annual volumes of colonoscopy and hospital visits for CRC in 2020 were more significantly declined in the old age group than in the young age group (both P<0.001). In addition, the annual volume of patients operated for CRC numerically more declined in old age group than in young age group. During the first surge of COVID-19 (March and April 2020), old age patients showed statistically significant declines for the monthly number of colonoscopies (–46.5% vs. –39.3%, P<0.001), hospital visits (–15.4% vs. –7.9%, P<0.001), CRC operations (–33.8% vs. –0.7%, P<0.05), and colonoscopic polypectomies (–41.8% vs. –38.0%, P<0.001) than young age patients, compared with those of same months in 2019. Conclusions Elderly population are more vulnerable for the management of CRC during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the elderly population are more carefully cared for in the management of CRC during the next pandemic.

Purpose: To identify the effect of a new leadership type by confirming the effect of clinical nurses' grit and nursing work environment on nursing performance and retention intention with the mediating effect of compassionate rationalism leadership in the process. Methods: A proportional stratified sampling method was used with 45 tertiary general hospitals nationwide as the sampling unit. An online survey targeting nurses who have been working continuously for more than one year was conducted from October 14 to November 9, 2022. The final analysis included 1,256 questionnaires. The correlation between the participants' variables was analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficients. The mediating effect was confirmed using a regression analysis, and bootstrapping. Results: The compassionate rationalism leadership had a mediating effect on the relationship between grit and nursing performance (F=203.21, p<.001), nursing work environment and nursing performance (F=109.48, p<.001), grit and retention intention (F=149.90, p<.001), and nursing work environment and retention intention (F=25.14, p<.001). Conclusion The compassionate rationalism leadership of nursing managers had a positive effect on nursing performance and retention intention.Therefore, with the development and application of educational programs of compassionate rationalism leadership, it can be used to improve nursing performance and operate an efficient nursing organization.

Objective: This study examined the characteristics of patients visiting the emergency department (ED) with fever after the chronification of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This retrospective observational study analyzed the medical records of patients who visited the ED with fever from May 1 to October 31, 2021, and the corresponding period in 2019. This study was conducted at a single center in Seoul, Korea. Results: There was no statistical difference in the comorbidities of the patients of the two groups: the AC (after the COVID-19 pandemic) group and the BC (before the COVID-19 pandemic) group. As for the level of consciousness at the time of ED arrival, there was a significantly larger decrease in consciousness (verbal response or less) in the AC group than in the BC group (P=0.002). In the case of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), the proportion was higher in the AC group in the moderate-risk and high-risk groups (P=0.003). The median time from symptom onset to ED arrival was 15.7 hours in the BC group and 13.8 hours in the AC group, and there was no significant difference (P=0.137). When leaving the ED, the AC group had a higher admission rate to the ward and intensive care unit than the BC group. There was no statistical difference in the in-hospital mortality between the two groups (2.9% and 2.4%, respectively; P=0.62). Conclusion Patients who visited the emergency room with fever after one year of the COVID-19 pandemic showed a similar time from symptom onset to ED arrival compared to patients who visited before the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality among these patients compared to those with fever before the COVID-19 pandemic.