Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Background: The defense and veterans pain rating scale (DVPRS) is a pain assessment tool combining a numerical rating scale (NRS) with descriptive words, colors, and facial expressions. This study aimed to validate the Korean version of the DVPRS (K-DVPRS) for postoperative pain assessment. Methods: This study included patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic abdominal surgery. The original DVPRS was translated into Korean using a forward-backward method. Pain intensities at rest and during coughing were assessed at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively using the NRS and K-DVPRS, respectively. The EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire was also used. The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the K-DVPRS were evaluated. Results: Of the 174 patients screened, 150 were enrolled, and 148 completed the study. The K-DVPRS had strong convergent validity with the NRS at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively (ρ: 0.75 to 0.78, all P < 0.001). Construct validity was confirmed by significant differences in pain scores based on surgical extent and duration. The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.77 and 0.85 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively), and test-retest reliability at 24 hours was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90 at rest and 0.95 during coughing).Responsiveness, measured by Cliff’s effect size, was high from preoperative to 24 hours postoperatively and moderate from 24 to 48 hours. At 48 hours, the K-DVPRS had stronger correlations with the EQ-5D-5L index and EQVAS than with the NRS. Conclusions The K-DVPRS is a valid, reliable, and responsive tool for assessing postoperative pain in Korean patients.

Purpose: Malnutrition is a prevalent condition leading to a high risk of morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis patients. This study examined the malnutrition risk and the influence of diabetes on clinical characteristics, nutritional knowledge, and dietary intake in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on hemodialysis. Methods: Seventy-six patients (37 with diabetes and 39 without diabetes) enrolled in an internal medicine hemodialysis unit in Seoul were examined. A questionnaire, anthropometric, biochemical, and three-day dietary record data were collected. The nutritional risk was screened by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), compared to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM). Results: The overall prevalence of malnutrition was 56.6% and 27.6% by PG-SGA and GLIM, respectively, showing the low sensitivity (34.9%) and agreement (kappa = 0.16) of GLIM compared to the PG-SGA. CKD patients with diabetes had a higher malnutrition risk and more comorbidities than those without diabetes (p < 0.05). More than 60% of patients had anemia and hypocholesterolemia. Despite the fair level of nutritional knowledge, the intakes of energy per ideal body weight, calcium, vitamin A, vitamin B 6 , folate, and vitamin C were below the nutritional guidelines for hemodialysis patients in more than 70% of the patients. When stratified according to sex, female patients showed marked differences, with lower energy, protein, fat, calcium, phosphorus, vitamin B 2 , folate, and vitamin B 12 intakes in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic patients. The most challenging aspect of diet therapy for hemodialysis patients was achieving the appropriate protein intake for diabetic patients and restricting phosphorus intake for non-diabetic patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion These findings suggest that attention should be paid to the malnutrition of diabetic hemodialysis patients. Individualized nutritional counseling and management are needed for the nutritional care of hemodialysis patients to address the nutritional deficiency.

Purpose: Malnutrition is a prevalent condition leading to a high risk of morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis patients. This study examined the malnutrition risk and the influence of diabetes on clinical characteristics, nutritional knowledge, and dietary intake in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on hemodialysis. Methods: Seventy-six patients (37 with diabetes and 39 without diabetes) enrolled in an internal medicine hemodialysis unit in Seoul were examined. A questionnaire, anthropometric, biochemical, and three-day dietary record data were collected. The nutritional risk was screened by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), compared to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM). Results: The overall prevalence of malnutrition was 56.6% and 27.6% by PG-SGA and GLIM, respectively, showing the low sensitivity (34.9%) and agreement (kappa = 0.16) of GLIM compared to the PG-SGA. CKD patients with diabetes had a higher malnutrition risk and more comorbidities than those without diabetes (p < 0.05). More than 60% of patients had anemia and hypocholesterolemia. Despite the fair level of nutritional knowledge, the intakes of energy per ideal body weight, calcium, vitamin A, vitamin B 6 , folate, and vitamin C were below the nutritional guidelines for hemodialysis patients in more than 70% of the patients. When stratified according to sex, female patients showed marked differences, with lower energy, protein, fat, calcium, phosphorus, vitamin B 2 , folate, and vitamin B 12 intakes in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic patients. The most challenging aspect of diet therapy for hemodialysis patients was achieving the appropriate protein intake for diabetic patients and restricting phosphorus intake for non-diabetic patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion These findings suggest that attention should be paid to the malnutrition of diabetic hemodialysis patients. Individualized nutritional counseling and management are needed for the nutritional care of hemodialysis patients to address the nutritional deficiency.

Purpose: Malnutrition is a prevalent condition leading to a high risk of morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis patients. This study examined the malnutrition risk and the influence of diabetes on clinical characteristics, nutritional knowledge, and dietary intake in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on hemodialysis. Methods: Seventy-six patients (37 with diabetes and 39 without diabetes) enrolled in an internal medicine hemodialysis unit in Seoul were examined. A questionnaire, anthropometric, biochemical, and three-day dietary record data were collected. The nutritional risk was screened by the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), compared to the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM). Results: The overall prevalence of malnutrition was 56.6% and 27.6% by PG-SGA and GLIM, respectively, showing the low sensitivity (34.9%) and agreement (kappa = 0.16) of GLIM compared to the PG-SGA. CKD patients with diabetes had a higher malnutrition risk and more comorbidities than those without diabetes (p < 0.05). More than 60% of patients had anemia and hypocholesterolemia. Despite the fair level of nutritional knowledge, the intakes of energy per ideal body weight, calcium, vitamin A, vitamin B 6 , folate, and vitamin C were below the nutritional guidelines for hemodialysis patients in more than 70% of the patients. When stratified according to sex, female patients showed marked differences, with lower energy, protein, fat, calcium, phosphorus, vitamin B 2 , folate, and vitamin B 12 intakes in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic patients. The most challenging aspect of diet therapy for hemodialysis patients was achieving the appropriate protein intake for diabetic patients and restricting phosphorus intake for non-diabetic patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion These findings suggest that attention should be paid to the malnutrition of diabetic hemodialysis patients. Individualized nutritional counseling and management are needed for the nutritional care of hemodialysis patients to address the nutritional deficiency.

Background: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved empagliflozin for reducing cardiovascular mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with both HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, limited data are available on the generalizability of empagliflozin to clinical practice. Therefore, we evaluated real-world eligibility and potential cost-effectiveness based on a nationwide prospective HF registry. Methods: A total of 3,108 HFrEF and 2,070 HFpEF patients from the Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry were analyzed. Eligibility was estimated by inclusion and exclusion criteria of EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) and EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trials and by FDA & EMA label criteria. The cost-utility analysis was done using a Markov model to project the lifetime medical cost and quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Results: Among the KorAHF patients, 91.4% met FDA & EMA label criteria, while 44.7% met the clinical trial criteria. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of empagliflozin was calculated at US$6,764 per QALY in the overall population, which is far below a threshold of US$18,182 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness benefit was more evident in patients with HFrEF (US$5,012 per QALY) than HFpEF (US$8,971 per QALY). Conclusion There is a large discrepancy in real-world eligibility for empagliflozin between FDA & EMA labels and clinical trial criteria. Empagliflozin is cost-effective in HF patients regardless of ejection fraction in South Korea health care setting. The efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in real-world HF patients should be further investigated for a broader range of clinical applications.

Background: There is insufficient data on the benefits of empiric antibiotic combinations for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). We aimed to investigate whether empiric antipseudomonal combination therapy with fluoroquinolones decreases mortality in patients with HAP. Methods: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to 16 tertiary and general hospitals in Korea between January 1 and December 31, 2019.Patients with risk factors for combination therapy were divided into anti-pseudomonal non-carbapenem β-lactam monotherapy and fluoroquinolone combination therapy groups.Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce selection bias. Results: In total, 631 patients with HAP were enrolled. Monotherapy was prescribed in 54.7% (n = 345) of the patients, and combination therapy was prescribed in 45.3% (n = 286).There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups (16.8% vs.18.2%, P = 0.729) or even after the PSM (17.5% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.913). After the PSM, adjusted hazard ratio for 30-day mortality from the combination therapy was 1.646 (95% confidence interval, 0.782–3.461; P = 0.189) in the Cox proportional hazards model. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the appropriateness of initial empiric antibiotics between the two groups (55.0% vs. 56.8%, P = 0.898). The proportion of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens was high in both groups. Conclusion Empiric anti-pseudomonal fluoroquinolone combination therapy showed no survival benefit compared to β-lactam monotherapy in patients with HAP. Caution is needed regarding the routine combination of fluoroquinolones in the empiric treatment of HAP patients with a high risk of MDR.