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.

Background: This study focuses on the establishment and operation of a stroke patient hotline program to help patients and their caregivers determine when acute neurological changes require emergency attention.Method: The stroke hotline was established at the Gyeonggi Regional Cerebrovascular Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, in June 2016. Patients diagnosed with stroke during admission or in outpatient clinics were registered and provided with stroke education. Consulting nurses managed hotline calls and made decisions about outpatient schedules or emergency room referrals, consulting physicians when necessary. The study analyzed consultation records from June 2016 to December 2020, assessing consultation volumes and types. Outcomes and hotline satisfaction were also evaluated. Results: Over this period, 6,851 patients were registered, with 1,173 patients (18%) undergoing 3,356 hotline consultations. The average monthly consultation volume increased from 29.2 cases in 2016 to 92.3 cases in 2020. Common consultation types included stroke symptoms (22.3%), blood pressure/glucose inquiries (12.8%), and surgery/procedure questions (12.6%). Unexpected outpatient visits decreased from 103 cases before the hotline to 81 cases after. Among the 2,244 consultations between January 2019 and December 2020, 9.6% were recommended hospital visits, with two cases requiring intra-arterial thrombectomy. Patient satisfaction ratings of 9–10 points increased from 64% in 2019 to 69% in 2020. Conclusion The stroke hotline program effectively reduced unexpected outpatient visits and achieved high patient satisfaction.Expanding the program could enhance the management of stroke-related neurological symptoms and minimize unnecessary healthcare resource utilization.

Osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures cause socioeconomic concerns, and medical system and policies appear insufficient to prepare for these issues in Korea, where the older adult population is rapidly increasing. Many countries around the world are already responding to osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures by adopting fracture liaison service (FLS), and such an attempt has only begun in Korea. In this article, we introduce the operation methods for institutions implementing FLS and characteristics of services, and activities of the FLS Committee for FLS implementation in the Korean Society for Bone and Mineral Research. In addition, we hope that the current position statement will contribute to the implementation of FLS in Korea and impel policy changes to enable a multidisciplinary and integrated FLS operated under the medical system.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effect of esophagectomy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) by comparing the chemoradiotherapy (CRT)-only group and the trimodality treatment (TMT) group who received concurrent CRT followed by surgery. Materials and Methods: We included 412 operable ESCC patients treated with TMT or CRT between January 2005 and December 2015. The oncological outcomes of the two groups were compared using a weighted Cox proportional-hazards model with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Results: The median survival time was 64 and 32 months in the TMT (n=270) and CRT (n=142) groups, respectively (p < 0.001). After IPTW, the median overall survival (OS) remained significantly higher in the TMT group than in the CRT group (61 months vs. 32 months, p=0.016). Moreover, the TMT group showed a better local recurrence-free rate (LRFR, p < 0.001) and distant metastasis-free rate (p=0.007). In the subgroup of patients with clinical complete response (cCR), the OS was not significantly different between the two groups, both before and after IPTW adjustment (p=0.35 and p=0.93). However, among non-cCR patients, the OS was significantly higher in the TMT group (64% vs. 45%, p < 0.001). Conclusion In patients with locally advanced ESCC, TMT was superior to CRT in terms of OS and LRFR. Such difference was more prominent in the non-cCR subgroup. In patients who achieved cCR, esophagectomy was effective in improving LRFR but not OS, suggesting that esophagectomy may be omitted in complete responders.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify whether stress experienced by those working in the local civil service was related to their oral health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A survey was conducted on 431 civil servants from eight districts, currently working in the Daegu City Hall had COVID-19 related work duties during the pandemic. Results: Several factors associated with oral health related quality of life were explored. Demographic details revealed that men had significantly better oral health related life quality as compared to women; further, being younger, being unmarried, and having a lower position had better outcomes for oral health related quality of life. Regarding the relationship between oral health behavior and oral health related quality of life, it was found that the better the subjective oral health, the higher the rate of not visiting the dentist in the past year. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a particularly important time to explore in order to understand how the stress experienced by local government officials is related to their oral health. It has been especially noted that the higher the work stress, the worse the oral health related quality of life amongst individuals. Conclusions Results of this study emphasize that at a time when fatigue among civil servants is increasing due to the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, oral conditions caused by stress should be identified and greater awareness should be created about oral health care.