Objective: This study examined the up-to-date facts from real cases of emergency medical litigations to provide information to act appropriately in medical lawsuits against emergency medicine specialists. Methods: Data were collected from lawsuits from 2008 to 2020. Thirty-nine cases were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Six emergency medicine specialists and one resident with a lawyer’s license participated in the analysis. Results: Medical litigations have surged since 2015. The lawsuits were due mainly to misdiagnoses and violations of the duty to explain. Medical staff won in 12 (38.7%) cases and lost in 19 (61.3%). The main reason for losing was a violation of the duty of care. In criminal claims, 50% of cases resulted in confinement. The win rate was 1.4 times higher in cases where consultation was requested from other specialties (42.9% and 29.4% win with consultation and without, respectively). Conclusion The win rate in lawsuits is decreasing, and the level of penalty is becoming more severe. The decrease in the violation of duty to explain was attributed to education through the years. The win rate was higher when consulting with other specialists. Hence, active consultation is recommended. In addition, the system of radiology interpretation requires improvement because of the many misdiagnoses from reading diagnostic images.

Objective: This study examined the up-to-date facts from real cases of emergency medical litigations to provide information to act appropriately in medical lawsuits against emergency medicine specialists. Methods: Data were collected from lawsuits from 2008 to 2020. Thirty-nine cases were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Six emergency medicine specialists and one resident with a lawyer’s license participated in the analysis. Results: Medical litigations have surged since 2015. The lawsuits were due mainly to misdiagnoses and violations of the duty to explain. Medical staff won in 12 (38.7%) cases and lost in 19 (61.3%). The main reason for losing was a violation of the duty of care. In criminal claims, 50% of cases resulted in confinement. The win rate was 1.4 times higher in cases where consultation was requested from other specialties (42.9% and 29.4% win with consultation and without, respectively). Conclusion The win rate in lawsuits is decreasing, and the level of penalty is becoming more severe. The decrease in the violation of duty to explain was attributed to education through the years. The win rate was higher when consulting with other specialists. Hence, active consultation is recommended. In addition, the system of radiology interpretation requires improvement because of the many misdiagnoses from reading diagnostic images.

Objective: This study examined the up-to-date facts from real cases of emergency medical litigations to provide information to act appropriately in medical lawsuits against emergency medicine specialists. Methods: Data were collected from lawsuits from 2008 to 2020. Thirty-nine cases were collected and analyzed retrospectively. Six emergency medicine specialists and one resident with a lawyer’s license participated in the analysis. Results: Medical litigations have surged since 2015. The lawsuits were due mainly to misdiagnoses and violations of the duty to explain. Medical staff won in 12 (38.7%) cases and lost in 19 (61.3%). The main reason for losing was a violation of the duty of care. In criminal claims, 50% of cases resulted in confinement. The win rate was 1.4 times higher in cases where consultation was requested from other specialties (42.9% and 29.4% win with consultation and without, respectively). Conclusion The win rate in lawsuits is decreasing, and the level of penalty is becoming more severe. The decrease in the violation of duty to explain was attributed to education through the years. The win rate was higher when consulting with other specialists. Hence, active consultation is recommended. In addition, the system of radiology interpretation requires improvement because of the many misdiagnoses from reading diagnostic images.

Background: This study aims to delineate the characteristic features of adjustment disorder (AjD) from those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and assess the discriminant validity of Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM)-5 PTSD measures by comparing self-reported data from an outpatient cohort. Methods: The study participants included psychiatric outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea.Psychological assessments comprised the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, the National Stressful Events Survey-PTSD Short Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, the Insomnia Severity Index, and the Short Form-8 Health Survey. Results: A total of 149 responses (51 participants with AjD and 98 with PTSD) were analyzed. It was observed that workplace conflict was the most common stressor among AjD patients (29%), while traffic accidents were the primary trauma source for PTSD patients (39%). Individuals with AjD reported significantly lower levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms, along with a higher quality of life. After controlling for educational level as a covariate, the differences in PTSD and depressive symptoms remained significant. Conclusion The findings of this study support the discriminant validity of DSM-5 PTSD measures for AjD and reinforce the notion that that AjD represents a milder form within the stress response spectrum.

Background: This study aims to delineate the characteristic features of adjustment disorder (AjD) from those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and assess the discriminant validity of Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM)-5 PTSD measures by comparing self-reported data from an outpatient cohort. Methods: The study participants included psychiatric outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea.Psychological assessments comprised the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, the National Stressful Events Survey-PTSD Short Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, the Insomnia Severity Index, and the Short Form-8 Health Survey. Results: A total of 149 responses (51 participants with AjD and 98 with PTSD) were analyzed. It was observed that workplace conflict was the most common stressor among AjD patients (29%), while traffic accidents were the primary trauma source for PTSD patients (39%). Individuals with AjD reported significantly lower levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms, along with a higher quality of life. After controlling for educational level as a covariate, the differences in PTSD and depressive symptoms remained significant. Conclusion The findings of this study support the discriminant validity of DSM-5 PTSD measures for AjD and reinforce the notion that that AjD represents a milder form within the stress response spectrum.

Background: This study aims to delineate the characteristic features of adjustment disorder (AjD) from those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and assess the discriminant validity of Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM)-5 PTSD measures by comparing self-reported data from an outpatient cohort. Methods: The study participants included psychiatric outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea.Psychological assessments comprised the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, the National Stressful Events Survey-PTSD Short Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, the Insomnia Severity Index, and the Short Form-8 Health Survey. Results: A total of 149 responses (51 participants with AjD and 98 with PTSD) were analyzed. It was observed that workplace conflict was the most common stressor among AjD patients (29%), while traffic accidents were the primary trauma source for PTSD patients (39%). Individuals with AjD reported significantly lower levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms, along with a higher quality of life. After controlling for educational level as a covariate, the differences in PTSD and depressive symptoms remained significant. Conclusion The findings of this study support the discriminant validity of DSM-5 PTSD measures for AjD and reinforce the notion that that AjD represents a milder form within the stress response spectrum.

Background: This study aims to delineate the characteristic features of adjustment disorder (AjD) from those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and assess the discriminant validity of Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM)-5 PTSD measures by comparing self-reported data from an outpatient cohort. Methods: The study participants included psychiatric outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea.Psychological assessments comprised the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, the National Stressful Events Survey-PTSD Short Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, the Insomnia Severity Index, and the Short Form-8 Health Survey. Results: A total of 149 responses (51 participants with AjD and 98 with PTSD) were analyzed. It was observed that workplace conflict was the most common stressor among AjD patients (29%), while traffic accidents were the primary trauma source for PTSD patients (39%). Individuals with AjD reported significantly lower levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms, along with a higher quality of life. After controlling for educational level as a covariate, the differences in PTSD and depressive symptoms remained significant. Conclusion The findings of this study support the discriminant validity of DSM-5 PTSD measures for AjD and reinforce the notion that that AjD represents a milder form within the stress response spectrum.

Background: This study aims to delineate the characteristic features of adjustment disorder (AjD) from those of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and assess the discriminant validity of Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM)-5 PTSD measures by comparing self-reported data from an outpatient cohort. Methods: The study participants included psychiatric outpatients at a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea.Psychological assessments comprised the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5, the National Stressful Events Survey-PTSD Short Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Beck Anxiety Inventory, the Insomnia Severity Index, and the Short Form-8 Health Survey. Results: A total of 149 responses (51 participants with AjD and 98 with PTSD) were analyzed. It was observed that workplace conflict was the most common stressor among AjD patients (29%), while traffic accidents were the primary trauma source for PTSD patients (39%). Individuals with AjD reported significantly lower levels of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms, along with a higher quality of life. After controlling for educational level as a covariate, the differences in PTSD and depressive symptoms remained significant. Conclusion The findings of this study support the discriminant validity of DSM-5 PTSD measures for AjD and reinforce the notion that that AjD represents a milder form within the stress response spectrum.

Ectopic thymic neoplasm, particularly ectopic thymic carcinoma, is a rare disease that presents as a neck mass. Here, we present a case of ectopic thymic squamous carcinoma in a 65-year-old man who presented with persistent hoarseness. After fine needle aspiration cytology, the patient underwent total thyroidectomy with lymph node dissection. The final histopathological examination revealed the ectopic thymic squamous carcinoma. The patient was discharged without any postoperative complications. The patient received adjuvant radiation therapy and did not progress during the 1-year follow-up period.

The real-time polymerase chain reaction (real-time RT-PCR) assay is currently used as a confirmatory test for the detection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) since the disease is in community transmission stage in South Korea. However, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety recently conditionally approved the COVID-19 self-test kit (which is a rapid severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] antigen detection assay), as an additional testing method. The rapid SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection test is difficult to use as a diagnostic tool or screening assay because of the high probability of false-negative results, as it has a lower sensitivity than the RT-PCR assay. However, it can be used as an adjunctive method because of high specificity and faster results. Considering the high specificity of the self-test kit, it is necessary to assume and treat COVID-19 self-test kit positive patients as confirmed COVID-19 patients. Therefore, emergency departments, pre-hospital caregivers and 119 rescuers should prepare a protocol with quarantined spaces and protective equipment for treating COVID-19 self-test kit positive patients, to prevent the spread of infection.