This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

This study explores the development, roles, and key initiatives of the Regional Environmental Health Centers in Korea, detailing their evolution through four distinct phases and their impact on environmental health policy and local governance. It chronicles the establishment and transformation of these centers from their inception in May 2007, through four developmental stages. Originally named Environmental Disease Research Centers, they were subsequently renamed Environmental Health Centers following legislative changes. The analysis includes the expansion in the number of centers, the transfer of responsibilities to local governments, and the launch of significant projects such as the Korean Children’s Environmental Health Study (Ko-CHENS ). During the initial phase (May 2007–February 2009), the 10 centers concentrated on research-driven activities, shifting from a media-centered to a receptor-centered approach. In the second phase, prompted by the enactment of the Environmental Health Act, six additional centers were established, broadening their scope to address national environmental health issues. The third phase introduced Ko-CHENS, a 20-year national cohort project designed to influence environmental health policy by integrating research findings into policy frameworks. The fourth phase marked a decentralization of authority, empowering local governments and redefining the centers' roles to focus on regional environmental health challenges. The Regional Environmental Health Centers have significantly evolved and now play a crucial role in addressing local environmental health issues and supporting local government policies. Their capacity to adapt and respond to region-specific challenges is essential for the effective implementation of environmental health policies, reflecting geographical, socioeconomic, and demographic differences.

Currently, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major threat to global public health. The antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) has been proposed as an important approach to overcome this crisis. ASP supports the optimal use of antimicrobials, including appropriate dosing decisions, administration duration, and administration routes. In Korea, efforts are being made to overcome AMR using ASPs as a national policy. The current study aimed to develop core elements of ASP that could be introduced in domestic medical facilities. A Delphi survey was conducted twice to select the core elements through expert consensus.The core elements for implementing the ASP included (1) leadership commitment, (2) operating system, (3) action, (4) tracking, (5) reporting, and (6) education. To ensure these core elements are present at medical facilities, multiple departments must collaborate as teams for ASP operations. Establishing a reimbursement system and a workforce for ASPs are prerequisites for implementing ASPs. To ensure that ASP core elements are actively implemented in medical facilities, it is necessary to provide financial support for ASPs in medical facilities, nurture the healthcare workforce in performing ASPs, apply the core elements to healthcare accreditation, and provide incentives to medical facilities by quality evaluation criteria.

Lymphomatoid granulomatosis (LG) is a rare B-cell type angiocentric lymphoproliferative disease that can progress to extranodal lymphoma with high mortality. It most commonly affects the lungs, although extrapulmonary systems, including the brain and skin, can also be involved. LG in pediatric patients has been very rarely reported in the literature with limited imaging features. Herein, we report a pediatric case of LG involving the lung and brain with characteristic imaging findings.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical practice patterns of Korean obstetricians and gynecologists the diagnosis and management of hypertensive disease in pregnant women. Methods: From April 2015 to October 2015, questionnaire was distributed via email to obstetricians who were members of the Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine. The survey consisted of 37 questions in 6 categories. Responses to the questions on the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, from diagnosis to treatment, were evaluated. Results: A total of 93 obstetricians and gynecologists responded to the survey. High blood pressure was allocated the highest priority as an index mainly used when deciding to hospitalize patients with hypertensive disease during pregnancy, followed by pregnancy symptoms, proteinuria, and blood test results. Calcium channel blocker (CCB) for oral administration and hydralazine for injection were preferred as antihypertensive drugs mainly used to control severe hypertension. Regarding the delivery method for hypertensive disease during pregnancy, in cases of preeclampsia, 63% of the respondents chose the delivery method according to the cervical status, and in cases of hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome and eclampsia, which increased in severity, 52% and 31% responded that the delivery method was determined according to the cervical status, respectively. In cases of mild preeclampsia, the 70% of respondents preferred 37–38 weeks of gestation for the delivery time. Regarding the use of aspirin in patient with hypertension during pregnancy, 52% of the respondents occasionally administered aspirin, and in patients with a history of hypertensive disease during pregnancy, only 43% were administered prophylactic aspirin. Conclusion Domestic obstetricians regarded blood pressure as the most meaningful factor when treating women with hypertension during pregnancy and considered blood pressure control as important. The preferred antihypertensive agents were oral CCB and hydralazine injections, and the choice of delivery method was determined according to the condition of the cervix and severity of the disease. Even in women with high risk factors for preeclampsia, prophylactic aspirin was administered in as low as 50%, of patients, possibly may due to the absence of domestic guidelines for aspirin use during pregnancy. Korean guidelines for prophylactic aspirin administration during pregnancy is needed based on additional research on the efficacy of aspirin for domestic women in the future.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical practice patterns of Korean obstetricians and gynecologists the diagnosis and management of hypertensive disease in pregnant women. Methods: From April 2015 to October 2015, questionnaire was distributed via email to obstetricians who were members of the Society for Maternal and Fetal Medicine. The survey consisted of 37 questions in 6 categories. Responses to the questions on the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, from diagnosis to treatment, were evaluated. Results: A total of 93 obstetricians and gynecologists responded to the survey. High blood pressure was allocated the highest priority as an index mainly used when deciding to hospitalize patients with hypertensive disease during pregnancy, followed by pregnancy symptoms, proteinuria, and blood test results. Calcium channel blocker (CCB) for oral administration and hydralazine for injection were preferred as antihypertensive drugs mainly used to control severe hypertension. Regarding the delivery method for hypertensive disease during pregnancy, in cases of preeclampsia, 63% of the respondents chose the delivery method according to the cervical status, and in cases of hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome and eclampsia, which increased in severity, 52% and 31% responded that the delivery method was determined according to the cervical status, respectively. In cases of mild preeclampsia, the 70% of respondents preferred 37–38 weeks of gestation for the delivery time. Regarding the use of aspirin in patient with hypertension during pregnancy, 52% of the respondents occasionally administered aspirin, and in patients with a history of hypertensive disease during pregnancy, only 43% were administered prophylactic aspirin. Conclusion Domestic obstetricians regarded blood pressure as the most meaningful factor when treating women with hypertension during pregnancy and considered blood pressure control as important. The preferred antihypertensive agents were oral CCB and hydralazine injections, and the choice of delivery method was determined according to the condition of the cervix and severity of the disease. Even in women with high risk factors for preeclampsia, prophylactic aspirin was administered in as low as 50%, of patients, possibly may due to the absence of domestic guidelines for aspirin use during pregnancy. Korean guidelines for prophylactic aspirin administration during pregnancy is needed based on additional research on the efficacy of aspirin for domestic women in the future.

This study aimed to identify the educational needs of people with type 2 diabetes according to risk perceptions and the level of severity of complications.