The sixth edition of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder (KMAP-DD) was published in 2025. This review compared KMAP-DD 2025 with four major international clinical practice guidelines: Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Major Depressive Disorders, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Depression Guideline, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists Clinical Practice Guidelines for Mood Disorders, and British Association for Psychopharmacology Guideline. While KMAP-DD is based on expert consensus, and others on evidence-based methods, overall treatment strategies for depressive episodes were fairly consistent. Especially, KMAP-DD 2025 offers more structured recommendations in areas lacking strong evidence, such as premenstrual dysphoric disorder, perinatal depression, and depression with medical comorbidities. KMAP-DD 2025 also reflected Korean clinical practice patterns emphasizing rapid symptom relief and early use of combination strategies. Despite limitations as a consensus-based guideline, KMAP-DD 2025 complements evidence-based approaches and provides practical, situation-specific guidance for real-world clinical decision-making in Korea.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of the Trauma-nursing Education and Skill Support (TESS) program based on the ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation model). The program was designed to enhance trauma nurses’ clinical competencies, including trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability, through the integration of theoretical education and simulation-based practice. Methods: A quasi-experimental study using a non-equivalent control group pretest–posttest design was conducted. Participants included 108 trauma nurses from regional trauma centers, military trauma centers, and emergency care facilities, who were assigned to an experimental group (n=52) or a control group (n=56). The TESS program consisted of a 2-day, 14-hour blended-learning course that included eight lecture sessions and four simulation-based practice stations. Data were collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at 6 months using validated instruments measuring trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used for data analysis. Results: The experimental group demonstrated significant improvements in trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability compared with baseline (all p<.001). These improvements were sustained at 6 months, although trauma-related knowledge scores showed a slight decline compared with immediate posttest levels. Between-group analyses confirmed significant group-by-time interaction effects for all outcomes: trauma-related knowledge (η2=0.12, p<.001), self-efficacy (η2=0.09, p=.002), and problem-solving ability (η2=0.08, p=.003). Conclusion The TESS program effectively enhanced trauma nurses’ trauma-related knowledge, self-efficacy, and problem-solving ability, with effects sustained for up to 6 months. Incorporating blended learning and simulation-based training into standardized trauma nursing education may strengthen clinical competencies and ultimately contribute to improved patient outcomes.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Background: and Purpose: This clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for treatment of dementia, focusing on cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other types of dementia. Methods: Using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes (PICO) framework, we developed key clinical questions and conducted systematic literature reviews. A multidisciplinary panel of experts, organized by the Korean Dementia Association, evaluated randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Recommendations were graded for evidence quality and strength using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Results: Three main recommendations are presented: (1) For AD, cholinesterase inhibitors (donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine) are strongly recommended for improving cognition and daily function based on moderate evidence; (2) Cholinesterase inhibitors are conditionally recommended for vascular dementia and Parkinson’s disease dementia, with a strong recommendation for Lewy body dementia; (3) For moderate to severe AD, NMDA receptor antagonist (memantine) is strongly recommended, demonstrating significant cognitive and functional improvements. Both drug classes showed favorable safety profiles with manageable side effects. Conclusions This guideline offers standardized, evidence-based pharmacologic recommendations for dementia management, with specific guidance on cholinesterase inhibitors and NMDA receptor antagonists. It aims to support clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in dementia care. Further updates will address emerging treatments, including amyloid-targeting therapies, to reflect advances in dementia management.

Objective: Since its development in 2002 by the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology and the Korean Society for Affective Disorders, the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder (KMAP-DD) has undergone five revisions. Methods: To improve survey efficiency, reflect general clinical practice, and facilitate comparisons with previous KMAP-DD revisions, the overall structure of the questionnaire was retained. The six sections of the questionnaire were as follows:1) pharmacological treatment strategies for major depressive disorder with and without psychotic features; 2) pharmacological treatment strategies for persistent depressive disorder and other depressive disorder subtypes; 3) consensus on treatment-resistant depression; 4) selection of an antidepressant in consideration of safety, adverse effects, and comorbid physical conditions; 5) treatment strategies for special populations (children/adolescents, elderly, and women); and 6) non-pharmacological biological therapies. First-, second-, and third-line treatment recommendations were statistically derived. Results: Compared to KMAP-DD 2021, only minor changes were noted, due to the limited introduction of new medications or treatment modalities. Nonetheless, notable shifts included an increased preference for atypical antipsychotics (AAPs), and higher preference of combination strategies involving AAPs and mood stabilizers, indicating a more proactive and intensive treatment trend in Korea. Conclusion KMAP-DD is expected to serve as a valuable clinical resource by providing expert consensus-based recommendations on specific treatment strategies and pharmacological options for major depressive disorders, thereby supporting the integration of real-world clinical practice with evidence-based medicine.

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been proposed to enhance liver regeneration, but its effects remain inconsistent across experimental models. This study evaluated whether autologous PRP promotes hepatic regeneration after major hepatectomy in rabbits and assessed the feasibility of this experimental approach. Methods: Twenty-one male New Zealand white rabbits underwent major hepatectomy and received saline (control) or PRP via portal vein or subcutaneous injection. Survival, pre- and postoperative laboratory results, regenerated liver weight, biochemical markers, and histologic features were compared. Results: Overall survival was 42%. Portal vein injection resulted in significantly higher mortality than subcutaneous injection (66% vs. 33%; p=0.050). Regenerated liver weight (approximately 60–70 g) and the graft-to-body weight ratio did not differ between groups. One PRP-treated rabbit demonstrated pronounced hepatic plate thickening, but overall regenerative markers showed no significant benefit. PRP preparations displayed variable leukocyte content. Conclusions PRP did not provide a measurable regenerative advantage in this rabbit major hepatectomy model. The high mortality and heterogeneous PRP composition emphasize the need for safer experimental designs and standardized PRP preparations to accurately assess its regenerative capacity.

Purpose: This study examined the clinical and radiological outcomes of TFNA (Trochanteric Fixation Nail-Advanced) and PFNA-II (Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation-II) used in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures. The association between lateral screw sliding and lateral trochanteric pain was analyzed. Materials and Methods: The study included 116 patients diagnosed with unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures who underwent intramedullary nailing surgery at the author’s hospital. The patients were divided into two groups: 72 who received PFNA-II and 44 who received TFNA. Ten patients with positive greater trochanter tenderness and 106 patients with negative tenderness were assessed for the factors associated with lateral trochanteric pain. The radiological outcomes included an evaluation of fracture union, screw position, tipapex distance, proximal femoral nail protrusion, and lateral sliding length of the helical blade. The clinical outcomes were assessed using the Harris Hip Score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, greater trochanter tenderness, and pre- and postoperative ambulation ability. Results: Thirty-three patients (45.8%) of the PFNA-II group and 18 (40.9%) of the TFNA group had lateral sliding of the helical blade, with no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.604). The VAS score was significantly higher in the TFNA group (3.77±1.71) than the PFNA-II group (3.10±1.57, p=0.032). Furthermore, the prevalence of a positive greater trochanter tenderness was significantly higher in the TFNA group (seven patients) than in the PFNA-II group (3 patients, p=0.04). Eight patients had lateral sliding in the positive greater trochanter tenderness group, whereas 43 had lateral sliding in the negative greater trochanter tenderness group (p=0.030). The lateral sliding length was 8.87±5.22 and 2.68±4.47 in the positive and negative groups, respectively (p<0.001). Conclusion The PFNA-II and TFNA groups showed favorable clinical and radiological outcomes, suggesting that both devices are suitable for treating unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures. A comparison of the two devices showed that TFNA induces more lateral trochanteric pain than PFNA-II, and the presence and extent of lateral sliding were associated with lateral trochanteric pain.

Background: As the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic continues, wearing masks has become a daily routine. As the mask-wearing time increased, the mask-covered skin was more likely to be influenced. Objective: This study aimed to identify face mask-wearing behaviors and their effects on patients with facial skin diseases. Methods: Patients with facial skin disease were surveyed at two institutions. The patterns of mask use, mask-associated skin problems, and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) were investigated. Results: A total of 174 participants were enrolled and the mean age was 42.2 years. Rosacea (35.6%) was the most common condition, followed by acne (25.3%) and contact dermatitis (17.2%). Ninety-four subjects (54.0%) reported that they wore masks for less than 6 hours a day, and 96 subjects (55.2%) wore masks to fit tightly against the face. Regarding the mask type, KF-99, 94, and 80 (62.6%) were the most common. Nearly three-quarters (n=128, 73.6%) of patients complained of mask-associated skin problems. Pimples were the most common symptom (59.4%), and the cheek was the most commonly affected area (67.2%). The mean DLQI score was 9.90. Conclusion We investigated the current patterns of mask use in patients with facial skin diseases. Moreover, it is necessary to recognize newly encountered relationships and seek strategies for relevant patients.