Background: With growing elderly populations, management of patients with acute stroke is increasingly important. In South Korea, the Acute Stroke Quality Assessment Program (ASQAP) has contributed to improving the quality of stroke care and practice behavior in healthcare institutions. While the mortality of hemorrhagic stroke remains high, there are only a few assessment indices associated with hemorrhagic stroke. Considering the need to develop assessment indices to improve the actual quality of care in the field of acute stroke treatment, this study aims to investigate the current status of human resources and practices related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke through a nationwide survey. Methods: For the healthcare institutions included in the Ninth ASQAP of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), data from January 2022 to December 2022 were collected through a survey on the current status and practice of healthcare providers related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items, including six items on healthcare providers involved in stroke care and 10 items on the care of patients with acute stroke. Results: In the treatment of patients with hemorrhagic stroke among patients with acute stroke, neurosurgeons were the most common providers. The contribution of neurosurgeons in the treatment of ischemic stroke has also been found to be equivalent to that of neurologists. However, a number of institutions were found to be devoid of healthcare providers who perform definitive treatments, such as intra-arterial thrombectomy for patients with ischemic stroke or cerebral aneurysm clipping for subarachnoid hemorrhage. The intensity of the workload of healthcare providers involved in the care of patients with acute stroke, especially those involved in definitive treatment, was also found to be quite high. Conclusion Currently, there are almost no assessment indices specific to hemorrhagic stroke in the ASQAP for acute stroke. Furthermore, it does not reflect the reality of the healthcare providers and practices that provide definitive treatment for acute stroke. The findings of this study suggest the need for the development of appropriate assessment indices that reflect the realities of acute stroke care.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

Background: With growing elderly populations, management of patients with acute stroke is increasingly important. In South Korea, the Acute Stroke Quality Assessment Program (ASQAP) has contributed to improving the quality of stroke care and practice behavior in healthcare institutions. While the mortality of hemorrhagic stroke remains high, there are only a few assessment indices associated with hemorrhagic stroke. Considering the need to develop assessment indices to improve the actual quality of care in the field of acute stroke treatment, this study aims to investigate the current status of human resources and practices related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke through a nationwide survey. Methods: For the healthcare institutions included in the Ninth ASQAP of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), data from January 2022 to December 2022 were collected through a survey on the current status and practice of healthcare providers related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items, including six items on healthcare providers involved in stroke care and 10 items on the care of patients with acute stroke. Results: In the treatment of patients with hemorrhagic stroke among patients with acute stroke, neurosurgeons were the most common providers. The contribution of neurosurgeons in the treatment of ischemic stroke has also been found to be equivalent to that of neurologists. However, a number of institutions were found to be devoid of healthcare providers who perform definitive treatments, such as intra-arterial thrombectomy for patients with ischemic stroke or cerebral aneurysm clipping for subarachnoid hemorrhage. The intensity of the workload of healthcare providers involved in the care of patients with acute stroke, especially those involved in definitive treatment, was also found to be quite high. Conclusion Currently, there are almost no assessment indices specific to hemorrhagic stroke in the ASQAP for acute stroke. Furthermore, it does not reflect the reality of the healthcare providers and practices that provide definitive treatment for acute stroke. The findings of this study suggest the need for the development of appropriate assessment indices that reflect the realities of acute stroke care.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.

Purpose: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is widely used for heart function evaluation in emergency departments (EDs), but requires specific equipment and skilled operators. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of a mobile application for estimating left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%] using electrocardiography (ECG) and tests its non-inferiority to POCUS. Materials and Methods: Patients (aged ≥20 years) were included if they had both a POCUS-based EF evaluation and an ECG within 24 hours of their ED visit between January and May 2022, along with formal echocardiography within 2 weeks before or after the visit. A mobile app (ECG Buddy, EB) estimated LVEF (EF from EB) and the risk of LV dysfunction (LV-Dysfunction score) from ECG waveforms, which were compared to NT-proBNP levels and POCUS-evaluated LVEF (EF from POCUS). A non-inferiority margin was set at an area under the curve (AUC) difference of 0.05. Results: Of the 181 patients included, 37 (20.4%) exhibited LV dysfunction. The AUCs for screening LV dysfunction using POCUS and NT-proBNP were 0.885 and 0.822, respectively. EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score outperformed NT-proBNP, with AUCs of 0.893 and 0.884, respectively (p=0.017 and p=0.030, respectively). EF from EB was non-inferior to EF from POCUS, while LV-Dysfunction score narrowly missed the mark. A subgroup analysis of sinus-origin rhythm ECGs supported the non-inferiority of both EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score to EF from POCUS. Conclusion A smartphone application that analyzes ECG image can screen for LV dysfunction with a level of accuracy comparable to that of POCUS.

Objectives: Nursing documentation consumes approximately 30% of nurses’ professional time, making improvements in efficiency essential for patient safety and workflow optimization. This study compares traditional nursing documentation methods with a generative artificial intelligence (AI)-based system, evaluating its effectiveness in reducing documentation time and ensuring the accuracy of AI-suggested entries. Furthermore, the study aims to assess the system’s impact on overall documentation efficiency and quality. Methods: Forty nurses with a minimum of 6 months of clinical experience participated. In the pre-assessment phase, they documented a nursing scenario using traditional electronic nursing records (ENRs). In the post-assessment phase, they used the SmartENR AI version, developed with OpenAI’s ChatGPT 4.0 API and customized for domestic nursing standards; it supports NANDA, SOAPIE, Focus DAR, and narrative formats. Documentation was evaluated on a 5-point scale for accuracy, comprehensiveness, usability, ease of use, and fluency. Results: Participants averaged 64 months of clinical experience. Traditional documentation required 467.18 ± 314.77 seconds, whereas AI-assisted documentation took 182.68 ± 99.71 seconds, reducing documentation time by approximately 40%. AI-generated documentation received scores of 3.62 ± 1.29 for accuracy, 4.13 ± 1.07 for comprehensiveness, 3.50 ± 0.93 for usability, 4.80 ± 0.61 for ease of use, and 4.50 ± 0.88 for fluency. Conclusions Generative AI substantially reduces the nursing documentation workload and increases efficiency. Nevertheless, further refinement of AI models is necessary to improve accuracy and ensure seamless integration into clinical practice with minimal manual modifications. This study underscores AI’s potential to improve nursing documentation efficiency and accuracy in future clinical settings.

Purpose: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is widely used for heart function evaluation in emergency departments (EDs), but requires specific equipment and skilled operators. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of a mobile application for estimating left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%] using electrocardiography (ECG) and tests its non-inferiority to POCUS. Materials and Methods: Patients (aged ≥20 years) were included if they had both a POCUS-based EF evaluation and an ECG within 24 hours of their ED visit between January and May 2022, along with formal echocardiography within 2 weeks before or after the visit. A mobile app (ECG Buddy, EB) estimated LVEF (EF from EB) and the risk of LV dysfunction (LV-Dysfunction score) from ECG waveforms, which were compared to NT-proBNP levels and POCUS-evaluated LVEF (EF from POCUS). A non-inferiority margin was set at an area under the curve (AUC) difference of 0.05. Results: Of the 181 patients included, 37 (20.4%) exhibited LV dysfunction. The AUCs for screening LV dysfunction using POCUS and NT-proBNP were 0.885 and 0.822, respectively. EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score outperformed NT-proBNP, with AUCs of 0.893 and 0.884, respectively (p=0.017 and p=0.030, respectively). EF from EB was non-inferior to EF from POCUS, while LV-Dysfunction score narrowly missed the mark. A subgroup analysis of sinus-origin rhythm ECGs supported the non-inferiority of both EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score to EF from POCUS. Conclusion A smartphone application that analyzes ECG image can screen for LV dysfunction with a level of accuracy comparable to that of POCUS.

Purpose: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is widely used for heart function evaluation in emergency departments (EDs), but requires specific equipment and skilled operators. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of a mobile application for estimating left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction [left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%] using electrocardiography (ECG) and tests its non-inferiority to POCUS. Materials and Methods: Patients (aged ≥20 years) were included if they had both a POCUS-based EF evaluation and an ECG within 24 hours of their ED visit between January and May 2022, along with formal echocardiography within 2 weeks before or after the visit. A mobile app (ECG Buddy, EB) estimated LVEF (EF from EB) and the risk of LV dysfunction (LV-Dysfunction score) from ECG waveforms, which were compared to NT-proBNP levels and POCUS-evaluated LVEF (EF from POCUS). A non-inferiority margin was set at an area under the curve (AUC) difference of 0.05. Results: Of the 181 patients included, 37 (20.4%) exhibited LV dysfunction. The AUCs for screening LV dysfunction using POCUS and NT-proBNP were 0.885 and 0.822, respectively. EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score outperformed NT-proBNP, with AUCs of 0.893 and 0.884, respectively (p=0.017 and p=0.030, respectively). EF from EB was non-inferior to EF from POCUS, while LV-Dysfunction score narrowly missed the mark. A subgroup analysis of sinus-origin rhythm ECGs supported the non-inferiority of both EF from EB and LV-Dysfunction score to EF from POCUS. Conclusion A smartphone application that analyzes ECG image can screen for LV dysfunction with a level of accuracy comparable to that of POCUS.

Background: With growing elderly populations, management of patients with acute stroke is increasingly important. In South Korea, the Acute Stroke Quality Assessment Program (ASQAP) has contributed to improving the quality of stroke care and practice behavior in healthcare institutions. While the mortality of hemorrhagic stroke remains high, there are only a few assessment indices associated with hemorrhagic stroke. Considering the need to develop assessment indices to improve the actual quality of care in the field of acute stroke treatment, this study aims to investigate the current status of human resources and practices related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke through a nationwide survey. Methods: For the healthcare institutions included in the Ninth ASQAP of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA), data from January 2022 to December 2022 were collected through a survey on the current status and practice of healthcare providers related to the treatment of patients with acute stroke. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items, including six items on healthcare providers involved in stroke care and 10 items on the care of patients with acute stroke. Results: In the treatment of patients with hemorrhagic stroke among patients with acute stroke, neurosurgeons were the most common providers. The contribution of neurosurgeons in the treatment of ischemic stroke has also been found to be equivalent to that of neurologists. However, a number of institutions were found to be devoid of healthcare providers who perform definitive treatments, such as intra-arterial thrombectomy for patients with ischemic stroke or cerebral aneurysm clipping for subarachnoid hemorrhage. The intensity of the workload of healthcare providers involved in the care of patients with acute stroke, especially those involved in definitive treatment, was also found to be quite high. Conclusion Currently, there are almost no assessment indices specific to hemorrhagic stroke in the ASQAP for acute stroke. Furthermore, it does not reflect the reality of the healthcare providers and practices that provide definitive treatment for acute stroke. The findings of this study suggest the need for the development of appropriate assessment indices that reflect the realities of acute stroke care.

This pilot study evaluates an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted electrocardiography (ECG) analysis system, QCG, to enhance urgent coronary angiography (CAG) decision-making for acute chest pain in the emergency department (ED). We retrospectively analyzed 300 ED cases, categorized as non-coronary chest pain (Group 1), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) without occlusive coronary artery disease (CAD) (Group 2), and ACS with occlusive CAD (Group 3). Six clinicians made urgent CAG decision using a conventional approach (clinical data and ECG) and a QCG-assisted approach (including QCG scores). The QCG-assisted approach improved correct CAG decisions in Group 2 (36.0% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.003) and Group 3 (85.3% vs. 90.0%, P = 0.017), with minimal impact in Group 1 (92.7% vs. 95.0%, P = 0.125). Diagnostic accuracy for ACS improved from 77% to 81% with QCG assistance and reached 82% with QCG alone, supporting AI's potential to enhance urgent CAG decisionmaking for ED chest pain cases.