Objective: Many studies have examined the July effect. However, little is known about the July effect in sepsis. We hypothesized that the July effect would result in worse outcomes for patients with sepsis. Methods: Data from patients with sepsis, collected prospectively between January 2018 and December 2021, were analyzed. In Korea, the new academic year starts on March 1, so the “July effect” appears in March. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included adherence to the Surviving Sepsis Campaign bundle. Outcomes in March were compared to other months. A multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was performed to adjust for confounders. Results: We included 843 patients. There were no significant differences in sepsis severity. The 30-day mortality in March was higher (49.0% vs. 28.5%, P<0.001). However, there was no difference in bundle adherence in March (42.2% vs. 48.0%, P=0.264). The multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression showed that the July effect was associated with 30-day mortality in patients with sepsis (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.925; 95% confidence interval, 1.405–2.638; P<0.001). Conclusion The July effect was associated with 30-day mortality in patients with sepsis. However, bundle adherence did not differ. These results suggest that the increase in mortality during the turnover period might be related to unmeasured in-hospital management. Intensive supervision and education of residents caring for patients with sepsis is needed in the beginning of training.

Background: Laminoplasty is a common and effective surgery for decompression of the spinal cord in multilevel cervical myelopathy. The midline splitting technique (MST) and the unilateral open door technique (UODT) are the two most commonly performed laminoplasty techniques with continuous debate on which is preferable. This study aimed to add light to the matter by comparing and exploring the possible causes of different outcomes. Methods: A total of 101 patients who underwent laminoplasty for degenerative cervical myelopathy were included in this study.Radiographic measurements including C2–7 Cobb angle, C2–7 range of motion (ROM), Pavlov ratio of the most compressed level, and canal area with diameter were compared. Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and complications including C5 palsy, axial neck pain, hinge fractures, and spacer displacement were also compared. Statistical analysis was performed using independent samples t-test, chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, and linear mixed model. Results: C2–7 ROM, canal diameter, Pavlov ratio, and mJOA score did not demonstrate differences between the two techniques.The UODT group had greater postoperative canal expansion but had more loss of C2–7 lordosis than did the MST group. Of the complications, hinge fractures were more common in the UODT group, with more loss of C2–7 lordosis in patients with hinge fractures. On the other hand, spacer displacement occurred only in the MST group, with lesser canal expansion in patients with spacer displacement. Conclusions The two laminoplasty techniques both demonstrated effectiveness in treating patients with multilevel cervical myelopathy. However, care should be given to avoid hinge fractures and spacer displacement since both can possibly lead to unfavorable outcomes.

Background: According to the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic experience, many emergency departments experience difficulties in responding to emerging infectious diseases and this has led to a public health crisis. Our emergency department (ED) is designed to respond to mass outbreaks of infection. Three major preparations were taken to respond to infectious disease; first, to improve the emergency department facilities;second, to created programs to respond to each phase of an epidemic of COVID-19; lastly, to implemented education and training to promote the safety of medical staff. We would like to share the actual responses and statistics of patients visiting emergency department during COVID-19 periods of pandemic. Materials and Methods: This research was conducted through a retrospective chart analysis provided by a public medical center with 502 beds since the first report of a COVID-19 confirmed case on January 19, 2020 to June 15, 2020 in Seoul, the capital of Korea. Our emergency department was designed based on Korean Regional Emergency Center Facility Standards, and modified throughout each phases of COVID-19 outbreak. Patients suspected to be infectious are screened in the triage, separating them from general patients, and then receive isolation treatment in isolated wards. Results: A total of 4,352 patients visited the ED. 3,202 screenings were conducted with 5 confirmed cases. Another 1,150 patients were treated with general emergent symptoms.There were no problems such as closure of the emergency department or isolation of medical staff while managing COVID-19 confirmed patients. Conclusion Improving emergency department facilities, create an operational program to respond to each phase of COVID-19 outbreak and implement educational programs enabled large number of screening tests and hospitalization for COVID-19 suspected patients while maintaining general medical services. Research in emergency department designs and operational programs should increase to combine research data with better ideas to respond not only during regular periods but also during periods of pandemic.

Background: The objective of this study was to examine the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on excess in-hospital mortality among patients who visited emergency departments (EDs) and to assess whether the excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic varies by community income level. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study using the National Emergency Department Information System (NEDIS) database in Korea. The study population was defined as patients who visited all 402 EDs with medical conditions other than injuries between January 27 and May 31, 2020 (after-COVID) and for the corresponding time period in 2019 (before-COVID). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The main exposure was the COVID-19 outbreak, and the interaction variable was county per capita income tax. We calculated the risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates by COVID-19 outbreak, as well as the difference-in-difference of risk-adjusted rates between the before-COVID and after-COVID groups according to the county income tax using a multilevel linear regression model with the interaction term. Results: A total of 11,662,167 patients (6,765,717 in before-COVID and 4,896,450 in afterCOVID) were included in the study with a 1.6% crude in-hospital mortality rate. The riskadjusted mortality rate in the after-COVID group was higher than that in the before-COVID group (1.82% vs. 1.50%, difference: 0.31% [0.30 to 0.33]; adjusted odds ratio: 1.22 [1.18 to 1.25]). The excess in-hospital mortality rate of the after-COVID in the lowest quartile group of county income tax was significantly higher than that in the highest quartile group (difference-in-difference: 0.18% (0.14 to 0.23); P-for-interaction: < 0.01). Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was excess in-hospital mortality among patients who visited EDs, and there were disparities in excess mortality depending on community socioeconomic positions.

Background: The purpose of this study was to review the nationwide emergency care-related health policies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disaster in Korea and to analyze the effects of the policies on the safety of patients who visit emergency departments (EDs) during this period. Methods: This study is a quasi-experiment study. The study population was patients who visited all 402 EDs in Korea between December 31, 2019 and May 13, 2020, using the National Emergency Department Information System (NEDIS) database. The study period was classified into 5 phases according to the level of national crisis warning of infectious disease and the implementation of emergency care-related health policies, and all study phases were 27 days. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcome was length of stay (LOS) in the ED during the COVID-19 outbreak. Results: The number of ED visits during the study period was 2,636,341, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 1.4%. The number of ED visits decreased from 803,160 in phase 1 to 496,619 in phase 5 during the study period. For in-hospital mortality, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval) was 0.77 (0.74–0.79) in phase 5 compared to phase 3. Additionally, by subgroup, the ORs were 0.69 (0.57–0.83) for the patients with acute myocardial infarction and 0.76 (0.67–0.87) for severe trauma in phase 5 compared to phase 3. The ED LOS increased while the number of ED visits decreased as the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, and the ED LOS declined after policy implementation (beta coefficient: −5.3 [−6.5 to −4.2] minutes in phase 5 compared to phase 3). Conclusion Implementing appropriate emergency care policies in the COVID-19 pandemic would have contributed to improving the safety of all emergency patients and reducing inhospital mortality by preventing excessive deaths.

Background: Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) for emergency department (ED) admission is a burden to high-level EDs. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and ED utilization patterns of patients who underwent single and double IHTs at high-level EDs in South Korea. Methods: This nationwide cross-sectional study analyzed data from the National Emergency Department Information System for the period of 2016–2018. All the patients who underwent IHT at Level I and II emergency centers during this time period were included. The patients were categorized into the single-transfer and double-transfer groups. The clinical characteristics and ED utilization patterns were compared between the two groups. Results: We found that 2.1% of the patients in the ED (n = 265,046) underwent IHTs; 18.1% of the pediatric patients (n = 3,556), and 24.2% of the adult patients (n = 59,498) underwent double transfers. Both pediatric (median, 141.0 vs. 208.0 minutes, P < 0.001) and adult (median, 189.0 vs. 308.0 minutes, P < 0.001) patients in the double-transfer group had longer duration of stay in the EDs. Patient's request was the reason for transfer in 41.9% of all IHTs (111,076 of 265,046). Unavailability of medical resources was the reason for transfer in 30.0% of the double transfers (18,920 of 64,054). Conclusion The incidence of double-transfer of patients is increasing. The main reasons for double transfers were patient's request and unavailability of medical resources at the firsttransfer hospitals. Emergency physicians and policymakers should focus on lowering the number of preventable double transfers.

Background: According to the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic experience, many emergency departments experience difficulties in responding to emerging infectious diseases and this has led to a public health crisis. Our emergency department (ED) is designed to respond to mass outbreaks of infection. Three major preparations were taken to respond to infectious disease; first, to improve the emergency department facilities;second, to created programs to respond to each phase of an epidemic of COVID-19; lastly, to implemented education and training to promote the safety of medical staff. We would like to share the actual responses and statistics of patients visiting emergency department during COVID-19 periods of pandemic. Materials and Methods: This research was conducted through a retrospective chart analysis provided by a public medical center with 502 beds since the first report of a COVID-19 confirmed case on January 19, 2020 to June 15, 2020 in Seoul, the capital of Korea. Our emergency department was designed based on Korean Regional Emergency Center Facility Standards, and modified throughout each phases of COVID-19 outbreak. Patients suspected to be infectious are screened in the triage, separating them from general patients, and then receive isolation treatment in isolated wards. Results: A total of 4,352 patients visited the ED. 3,202 screenings were conducted with 5 confirmed cases. Another 1,150 patients were treated with general emergent symptoms.There were no problems such as closure of the emergency department or isolation of medical staff while managing COVID-19 confirmed patients. Conclusion Improving emergency department facilities, create an operational program to respond to each phase of COVID-19 outbreak and implement educational programs enabled large number of screening tests and hospitalization for COVID-19 suspected patients while maintaining general medical services. Research in emergency department designs and operational programs should increase to combine research data with better ideas to respond not only during regular periods but also during periods of pandemic.

Background: The objective of this study was to examine the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on excess in-hospital mortality among patients who visited emergency departments (EDs) and to assess whether the excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic varies by community income level. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study using the National Emergency Department Information System (NEDIS) database in Korea. The study population was defined as patients who visited all 402 EDs with medical conditions other than injuries between January 27 and May 31, 2020 (after-COVID) and for the corresponding time period in 2019 (before-COVID). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The main exposure was the COVID-19 outbreak, and the interaction variable was county per capita income tax. We calculated the risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates by COVID-19 outbreak, as well as the difference-in-difference of risk-adjusted rates between the before-COVID and after-COVID groups according to the county income tax using a multilevel linear regression model with the interaction term. Results: A total of 11,662,167 patients (6,765,717 in before-COVID and 4,896,450 in afterCOVID) were included in the study with a 1.6% crude in-hospital mortality rate. The riskadjusted mortality rate in the after-COVID group was higher than that in the before-COVID group (1.82% vs. 1.50%, difference: 0.31% [0.30 to 0.33]; adjusted odds ratio: 1.22 [1.18 to 1.25]). The excess in-hospital mortality rate of the after-COVID in the lowest quartile group of county income tax was significantly higher than that in the highest quartile group (difference-in-difference: 0.18% (0.14 to 0.23); P-for-interaction: < 0.01). Conclusion During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was excess in-hospital mortality among patients who visited EDs, and there were disparities in excess mortality depending on community socioeconomic positions.

Background: The purpose of this study was to review the nationwide emergency care-related health policies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disaster in Korea and to analyze the effects of the policies on the safety of patients who visit emergency departments (EDs) during this period. Methods: This study is a quasi-experiment study. The study population was patients who visited all 402 EDs in Korea between December 31, 2019 and May 13, 2020, using the National Emergency Department Information System (NEDIS) database. The study period was classified into 5 phases according to the level of national crisis warning of infectious disease and the implementation of emergency care-related health policies, and all study phases were 27 days. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary outcome was length of stay (LOS) in the ED during the COVID-19 outbreak. Results: The number of ED visits during the study period was 2,636,341, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 1.4%. The number of ED visits decreased from 803,160 in phase 1 to 496,619 in phase 5 during the study period. For in-hospital mortality, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval) was 0.77 (0.74–0.79) in phase 5 compared to phase 3. Additionally, by subgroup, the ORs were 0.69 (0.57–0.83) for the patients with acute myocardial infarction and 0.76 (0.67–0.87) for severe trauma in phase 5 compared to phase 3. The ED LOS increased while the number of ED visits decreased as the COVID-19 pandemic progressed, and the ED LOS declined after policy implementation (beta coefficient: −5.3 [−6.5 to −4.2] minutes in phase 5 compared to phase 3). Conclusion Implementing appropriate emergency care policies in the COVID-19 pandemic would have contributed to improving the safety of all emergency patients and reducing inhospital mortality by preventing excessive deaths.

Background: Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) for emergency department (ED) admission is a burden to high-level EDs. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and ED utilization patterns of patients who underwent single and double IHTs at high-level EDs in South Korea. Methods: This nationwide cross-sectional study analyzed data from the National Emergency Department Information System for the period of 2016–2018. All the patients who underwent IHT at Level I and II emergency centers during this time period were included. The patients were categorized into the single-transfer and double-transfer groups. The clinical characteristics and ED utilization patterns were compared between the two groups. Results: We found that 2.1% of the patients in the ED (n = 265,046) underwent IHTs; 18.1% of the pediatric patients (n = 3,556), and 24.2% of the adult patients (n = 59,498) underwent double transfers. Both pediatric (median, 141.0 vs. 208.0 minutes, P < 0.001) and adult (median, 189.0 vs. 308.0 minutes, P < 0.001) patients in the double-transfer group had longer duration of stay in the EDs. Patient's request was the reason for transfer in 41.9% of all IHTs (111,076 of 265,046). Unavailability of medical resources was the reason for transfer in 30.0% of the double transfers (18,920 of 64,054). Conclusion The incidence of double-transfer of patients is increasing. The main reasons for double transfers were patient's request and unavailability of medical resources at the firsttransfer hospitals. Emergency physicians and policymakers should focus on lowering the number of preventable double transfers.