Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: The accuracy of Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) mappings is reportedly low, and the LOINC codes used for research purposes in Korea have not been validated for accuracy or usability. Our study aimed to evaluate the discrepancies and similarities in interoperability using existing LOINC mappings in actual patient care settings. Methods: We collected data on local test codes and their corresponding LOINC mappings from seven university hospitals. Our analysis focused on laboratory tests that are frequently requested, excluding clinical microbiology and molecular tests. Codes from nationwide proficiency tests served as intermediary benchmarks for comparison. A research team, comprising clinical pathologists and terminology experts, utilized the LOINC manual to reach a consensus on determining the most suitable LOINC codes. Results: A total of 235 LOINC codes were designated as optimal codes for 162 frequent tests.Among these, 51 test items, including 34 urine tests, required multiple optimal LOINC codes, primarily due to unnoted properties such as whether the test was quantitative or qualitative, or differences in measurement units. We analyzed 962 LOINC codes linked to 162 tests across seven institutions, discovering that 792 (82.3%) of these codes were consistent. Inconsistencies were most common in the analyte component (38 inconsistencies, 33.3%), followed by the method (33 inconsistencies, 28.9%), and properties (13 inconsistencies, 11.4%). Conclusion This study reveals a significant inconsistency rate of over 15% in LOINC mappings utilized for research purposes in university hospitals, underlining the necessity for expert verification to enhance interoperability in real patient care.

Background: Preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) is crucial for maternal safety during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. While midazolam is known to prevent IONV, we hypothesized that remimazolam would be superior due to its minimal hemodynamic effects. We compared the effects of the two drugs on IONV. Methods: Parturients scheduled for cesarean section were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam or remimazolam. They received midazolam 2 mg or remimazolam 5 mg, with additional doses administered upon request. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of newly developed IONV during sedation. Other outcomes included overall IONV, rescue antiemetic use, shivering, hemodynamic variables, sedation scale scores, and satisfaction scores. Results: Data from 80 participants were analyzed. Deeper sedation was induced in the remimazolam group (PGroup × Time < 0.001) despite comparable hemodynamic trends between the groups. The incidence of overall IONV was comparable between the two groups (27.5% in the midazolam group vs. 17.5% in the remimazolam group, absolute risk reduction [ARR]: 0.100, 95% CI [−0.082, 0.282], P = 0.284); however, newly developed IONV during sedation was significantly reduced in the remimazolam group (20.0% vs. 5.0%, ARR: 0.150, 95% CI [0.009, 0.291], P = 0.043). The need for rescue antiemetics was also lower in the remimazolam group (15.0% vs. 2.5%, ARR: 0.125, 95% CI [0.004, 0.246], P = 0.048). Conclusion Remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence and severity of newly developed IONV compared with midazolam, with minimal impact on hemodynamics, making it a useful sedative option for cesarean section.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted healthcare services, including chronic disease management, for vulnerable groups, such as older individuals with hypertension. This study aimed to evaluate hypertension management in South Korea’s elderly population during the pandemic using treatment consistency indices such as the continuity of care (COC), modified, modified continuity index (MMCI), and most frequent provider continuity (MFPC). Methods: This study used the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency-COVID-19-National Health Insurance Service cohort (K-COV-N cohort) from the National Health Insurance Service between 2017 and 2021. The research included a total of 4,097,299 hypertensive patients aged 65 years or older. We defined 2018 and 2019 as the baseline period before the COVID-19 pandemic and 2020 and 2021 as the COVID-19 period and calculated the indices of medical continuity (number of visits, COC, MMCI, and MFPC) on a yearly basis. Results: The number of visits decreased during the COVID-19 period compared to the baseline period (59.64±52.75 vs. 50.49±50.33, P<0.001). However, COC, MMCI, and MFPC were not decreased in the baseline period compared to the COVID-19 period (0.71±0.21 vs. 0.71±0.22, P<0.001; 0.97±0.05 vs. 0.96±0.05, P<0.001; 0.8±0.17 vs. 0.8±0.17, P<0.001, respectively). Conclusion COVID-19 had no significant impact on the continuity of care but affected the frequency of outpatient visits for older patients with hypertension. However, this study highlights the importance of addressing healthcare inequalities, especially in older patients with hypertension, during pandemics and advocates for policy changes to ensure continued care for vulnerable populations.

Background: Preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) is crucial for maternal safety during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. While midazolam is known to prevent IONV, we hypothesized that remimazolam would be superior due to its minimal hemodynamic effects. We compared the effects of the two drugs on IONV. Methods: Parturients scheduled for cesarean section were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam or remimazolam. They received midazolam 2 mg or remimazolam 5 mg, with additional doses administered upon request. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of newly developed IONV during sedation. Other outcomes included overall IONV, rescue antiemetic use, shivering, hemodynamic variables, sedation scale scores, and satisfaction scores. Results: Data from 80 participants were analyzed. Deeper sedation was induced in the remimazolam group (PGroup × Time < 0.001) despite comparable hemodynamic trends between the groups. The incidence of overall IONV was comparable between the two groups (27.5% in the midazolam group vs. 17.5% in the remimazolam group, absolute risk reduction [ARR]: 0.100, 95% CI [−0.082, 0.282], P = 0.284); however, newly developed IONV during sedation was significantly reduced in the remimazolam group (20.0% vs. 5.0%, ARR: 0.150, 95% CI [0.009, 0.291], P = 0.043). The need for rescue antiemetics was also lower in the remimazolam group (15.0% vs. 2.5%, ARR: 0.125, 95% CI [0.004, 0.246], P = 0.048). Conclusion Remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence and severity of newly developed IONV compared with midazolam, with minimal impact on hemodynamics, making it a useful sedative option for cesarean section.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted healthcare services, including chronic disease management, for vulnerable groups, such as older individuals with hypertension. This study aimed to evaluate hypertension management in South Korea’s elderly population during the pandemic using treatment consistency indices such as the continuity of care (COC), modified, modified continuity index (MMCI), and most frequent provider continuity (MFPC). Methods: This study used the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency-COVID-19-National Health Insurance Service cohort (K-COV-N cohort) from the National Health Insurance Service between 2017 and 2021. The research included a total of 4,097,299 hypertensive patients aged 65 years or older. We defined 2018 and 2019 as the baseline period before the COVID-19 pandemic and 2020 and 2021 as the COVID-19 period and calculated the indices of medical continuity (number of visits, COC, MMCI, and MFPC) on a yearly basis. Results: The number of visits decreased during the COVID-19 period compared to the baseline period (59.64±52.75 vs. 50.49±50.33, P<0.001). However, COC, MMCI, and MFPC were not decreased in the baseline period compared to the COVID-19 period (0.71±0.21 vs. 0.71±0.22, P<0.001; 0.97±0.05 vs. 0.96±0.05, P<0.001; 0.8±0.17 vs. 0.8±0.17, P<0.001, respectively). Conclusion COVID-19 had no significant impact on the continuity of care but affected the frequency of outpatient visits for older patients with hypertension. However, this study highlights the importance of addressing healthcare inequalities, especially in older patients with hypertension, during pandemics and advocates for policy changes to ensure continued care for vulnerable populations.

Background: Preventing intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) is crucial for maternal safety during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. While midazolam is known to prevent IONV, we hypothesized that remimazolam would be superior due to its minimal hemodynamic effects. We compared the effects of the two drugs on IONV. Methods: Parturients scheduled for cesarean section were randomly assigned to receive either midazolam or remimazolam. They received midazolam 2 mg or remimazolam 5 mg, with additional doses administered upon request. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of newly developed IONV during sedation. Other outcomes included overall IONV, rescue antiemetic use, shivering, hemodynamic variables, sedation scale scores, and satisfaction scores. Results: Data from 80 participants were analyzed. Deeper sedation was induced in the remimazolam group (PGroup × Time < 0.001) despite comparable hemodynamic trends between the groups. The incidence of overall IONV was comparable between the two groups (27.5% in the midazolam group vs. 17.5% in the remimazolam group, absolute risk reduction [ARR]: 0.100, 95% CI [−0.082, 0.282], P = 0.284); however, newly developed IONV during sedation was significantly reduced in the remimazolam group (20.0% vs. 5.0%, ARR: 0.150, 95% CI [0.009, 0.291], P = 0.043). The need for rescue antiemetics was also lower in the remimazolam group (15.0% vs. 2.5%, ARR: 0.125, 95% CI [0.004, 0.246], P = 0.048). Conclusion Remimazolam significantly reduced the incidence and severity of newly developed IONV compared with midazolam, with minimal impact on hemodynamics, making it a useful sedative option for cesarean section.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted healthcare services, including chronic disease management, for vulnerable groups, such as older individuals with hypertension. This study aimed to evaluate hypertension management in South Korea’s elderly population during the pandemic using treatment consistency indices such as the continuity of care (COC), modified, modified continuity index (MMCI), and most frequent provider continuity (MFPC). Methods: This study used the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency-COVID-19-National Health Insurance Service cohort (K-COV-N cohort) from the National Health Insurance Service between 2017 and 2021. The research included a total of 4,097,299 hypertensive patients aged 65 years or older. We defined 2018 and 2019 as the baseline period before the COVID-19 pandemic and 2020 and 2021 as the COVID-19 period and calculated the indices of medical continuity (number of visits, COC, MMCI, and MFPC) on a yearly basis. Results: The number of visits decreased during the COVID-19 period compared to the baseline period (59.64±52.75 vs. 50.49±50.33, P<0.001). However, COC, MMCI, and MFPC were not decreased in the baseline period compared to the COVID-19 period (0.71±0.21 vs. 0.71±0.22, P<0.001; 0.97±0.05 vs. 0.96±0.05, P<0.001; 0.8±0.17 vs. 0.8±0.17, P<0.001, respectively). Conclusion COVID-19 had no significant impact on the continuity of care but affected the frequency of outpatient visits for older patients with hypertension. However, this study highlights the importance of addressing healthcare inequalities, especially in older patients with hypertension, during pandemics and advocates for policy changes to ensure continued care for vulnerable populations.