Background and Objectives: Clinical characteristics and outcomes in acute heart failure (AHF) vary by phenotype. We assessed phenotype-specific features, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a nationwide Korean cohort. Methods: The Korean Heart Failure III registry prospectively enrolled 7,351 AHF admissions at 47 hospitals. Among 6,777 patients with available left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), phenotypes were defined as heart failure with reduced EF (HFrEF, ≤40%), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF,41–49%), or preserved EF (HFpEF, ≥50%). The primary endpoint was a 12-month composite of all-cause death or heart transplantation, evaluated from index admission and, among hospital survivors, from discharge. We used inverse probability weighting (multinomial generalized boosted models with stabilized, trimmed weights) and weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Phenotype distribution was 58.9% HFrEF, 13.6% HFmrEF, and 27.5% HFpEF. Crude 12-month composite rates from index admission were 13.4% (HFrEF), 12.7% (HFmrEF), and 16.8% (HFpEF). After weighting, from index admission, HFmrEF (HR, 0.892; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.731–1.088) and HFpEF (HR, 1.101; 95% CI, 0.939–1.291) did not differ from HFrEF; from discharge, HFpEF had modestly higher risk (HR, 1.207; 95% CI, 1.008–1.445) whereas HFmrEF did not (HR, 1.039; 95% CI, 0.844–1.279). Hyponatremia and chronic kidney disease were consistent adverse markers, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/ angiotensin II receptor blocker use at discharge was protective. Conclusions Across the EF spectrum, phenotypes showed distinct profiles and risk. Postdischarge risk was modestly higher in HFpEF, supporting phenotype-tailored care and systematic discharge optimization in Korean patients with AHF.

Heart failure (HF) prevalence and associated socio-economic costs have risen rapidly in Korea, creating urgent demand for a national, standardized prospective registry to support quality monitoring, outcome comparison, and real-world evidence. Standardized data definitions are essential for valid comparisons across studies and healthcare settings. We created a unified national HF cohort by integrating the two largest Korean registries, KorAHF (2011–2014;n=5,625) and KorHF III (2018–2023; n=7,351), yielding 12,976 hospitalized HF patients. Because heterogeneous variable definitions impeded direct comparisons, we implemented a harmonization pipeline across demographic, clinical, imaging, biomarker, therapeutic, and outcome domains, aligned with international standards and reinforced by systematic data quality checks.A multidisciplinary panel then conducted a structured decision process to produce the Korean HF Standard Dataset, a tiered and interoperable variable set spanning six domains: demographics, presentation at admission, in-hospital events and comorbidities, discharge status, outpatient follow-up, and readmission events. This integrated platform and standardized variables enable precise identification of HF patient phenotypes and prognostic factors, establishing an evidence-based foundation for disease management. This supports an analysis of temporal changes in treatment patterns and outcomes, generates data to inform future clinical practice guidelines, and provides a practical basis for planning large, continuous, prospective HF registries. Furthermore, it also facilitates pragmatic, registry-based randomized clinical trials and unmet-needs assessments that can guide national health policy. Establishing a foundation for future linkage with national health databases, this platform will allow for enhanced accuracy, comparability, and representativeness, powering quality improvement initiatives and population-level monitoring of Korea’s growing HF burden.

Background and Objectives: Inconsistencies in nasal nitric oxide (nNO) values, due to anatomical variations and comorbidities, challenge the accurate assessment of upper airway inflammation severity. We hypothesized that changes in nNO levels following treatment for chronic rhinitis would be consistent and provide relative value. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between changes in nNO levels and symptomatic improvements following treatment for chronic rhinitis. Methods: This prospective observational study included 46 participants diagnosed with chronic rhinitis between December 2021 and November 2023. nNO measurements, evaluations of four nasal and two ocular symptoms, and quality of life questionnaires were conducted at baseline and after one month of treatment. Baseline laboratory tests included serum total immunoglobulin E levels, blood eosinophil percentages, and skin prick tests. Results: The Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), TNSS with ocular symptoms (TNSS eye), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scores significantly decreased following treatment (all p<0.001). nNO levels also decreased significantly after treatment (p=0.036). Moreover, changes in nNO were significantly correlated with changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores (p=0.047, r=0.294; p=0.021, r=0.340; and p=0.004, r=0.419, respectively). Conclusion In patients with chronic rhinitis, changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores were correlated with changes in nNO levels after treatment. nNO may serve as a potential objective evaluation tool for chronic rhinitis, particularly in patients who have difficulty reporting symptoms.

Background and Objectives: Inconsistencies in nasal nitric oxide (nNO) values, due to anatomical variations and comorbidities, challenge the accurate assessment of upper airway inflammation severity. We hypothesized that changes in nNO levels following treatment for chronic rhinitis would be consistent and provide relative value. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between changes in nNO levels and symptomatic improvements following treatment for chronic rhinitis. Methods: This prospective observational study included 46 participants diagnosed with chronic rhinitis between December 2021 and November 2023. nNO measurements, evaluations of four nasal and two ocular symptoms, and quality of life questionnaires were conducted at baseline and after one month of treatment. Baseline laboratory tests included serum total immunoglobulin E levels, blood eosinophil percentages, and skin prick tests. Results: The Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), TNSS with ocular symptoms (TNSS eye), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scores significantly decreased following treatment (all p<0.001). nNO levels also decreased significantly after treatment (p=0.036). Moreover, changes in nNO were significantly correlated with changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores (p=0.047, r=0.294; p=0.021, r=0.340; and p=0.004, r=0.419, respectively). Conclusion In patients with chronic rhinitis, changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores were correlated with changes in nNO levels after treatment. nNO may serve as a potential objective evaluation tool for chronic rhinitis, particularly in patients who have difficulty reporting symptoms.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Background and Objectives: Inconsistencies in nasal nitric oxide (nNO) values, due to anatomical variations and comorbidities, challenge the accurate assessment of upper airway inflammation severity. We hypothesized that changes in nNO levels following treatment for chronic rhinitis would be consistent and provide relative value. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between changes in nNO levels and symptomatic improvements following treatment for chronic rhinitis. Methods: This prospective observational study included 46 participants diagnosed with chronic rhinitis between December 2021 and November 2023. nNO measurements, evaluations of four nasal and two ocular symptoms, and quality of life questionnaires were conducted at baseline and after one month of treatment. Baseline laboratory tests included serum total immunoglobulin E levels, blood eosinophil percentages, and skin prick tests. Results: The Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS), TNSS with ocular symptoms (TNSS eye), and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scores significantly decreased following treatment (all p<0.001). nNO levels also decreased significantly after treatment (p=0.036). Moreover, changes in nNO were significantly correlated with changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores (p=0.047, r=0.294; p=0.021, r=0.340; and p=0.004, r=0.419, respectively). Conclusion In patients with chronic rhinitis, changes in TNSS, TNSS eye, and RQLQ scores were correlated with changes in nNO levels after treatment. nNO may serve as a potential objective evaluation tool for chronic rhinitis, particularly in patients who have difficulty reporting symptoms.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.

Objective: In South Korea, there is a significant gap in systematic, evidence-based research on intensive case management (ICM) for individuals with severe mental illness (SMI). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of ICM through a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing ICM with standard case management (non-ICM). Methods: An RCT was conducted to assess the effectiveness of Seoul-intensive case management (S-ICM) vs. non-ICM in individuals with SMI in Seoul. A total of 78 participants were randomly assigned to either the S-ICM group (n=41) or the control group (n=37). Various clinical assessments, including the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Health of the Nation Outcome Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I), along with quality-of-life measures such as the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, WHO Quality of Life scale, and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) were evaluated over a 3-month period. Statistical analyses, including analysis of covariance and logistic regression, were used to determine the effectiveness of S-ICM. Results: The S-ICM group had significantly lower odds of self-harm or suicidal attempts compared to the control group (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–1.38). Psychiatric symptoms measured by the BPRS and perceived social support measured by the MSPSS significantly improved in the S-ICM group. The S-ICM group also had significantly higher odds of CGI-I compared to the control group (aOR=8.20, 95% CI: 2.66–25.32). Conclusion This study provides inaugural evidence on the effectiveness of S-ICM services, supporting their standardization and potential nationwide expansion.