Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: To analyze the effects of socioeconomic status (type of insurance and income level) and cancer stage on the survival of patients with liver cancer in Korea. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was constructed using data from the Healthcare Big Data Platform project in Korea between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017. A total of 143,511 patients in Korea diagnosed with liver cancer (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision [ICD-10] codes C22, C220, and C221) were followed for an average of 11 years. Of these, 110,443 died. The patient’s insurance type and income level were used as indicators of socioeconomic status. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model to analyze the relationship between the effects of sex, age, and cancer stage at first diagnosis (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and the End Results; SEER), type of insurance, and income level on the survival of patients with liver cancer. The interactive effects of the type of insurance, income level, and cancer stage on liver cancer death were also analyzed. Results: The lowest income group (medical aid) showed a higher risk for mortality (HR (95% CI); 1.37 (1.27–1.47) for all patients, 1.44 (1.32–1.57) for men, and 1.16 (1.01–1.34) for women) compared to the highest income group (1–6) among liver cancer (ICD-10 code C22) patients. The risk of liver cancer death was also higher in the lowest income group with a distant cancer stage (SEER = 7) diagnosis than for any other group. Conclusion Liver cancer patients with lower socioeconomic status and more severe cancer stages were at greater risk of death. Reducing social inequalities is needed to improve mortality rates among patients in lower social class groups who present with advanced cancer.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.

Plastic cannulae have attracted increasing interest as an alternative to traditional metal needles with the aim of reducing cannulation-related complications. We investigated whether the substitution volumes during hemodiafiltration differ using these two types of needles in dialysis patients. Methods: An intervention study involving 26 hemodialysis patients was conducted in Korea between March and September in 2021. Patients first received online hemodiafiltration using traditional metal needles, and thereafter plastic cannulae were used in a stepwise protocol. Repeated-measures design and linear mixed-effect models were used to compare substitution volumes between the two needle types with the same inner diameter. Results: The mean patient age was 62.7 years, and their mean dialysis vintage was 95.2 months. Most patients (92.3%) had an arteriovenous fistula as the vascular access. The substitution volume increased as blood flow and needle size increased for both plastic cannulae and metal needles. The substitution volume was significantly higher with 17-gauge (G) plastic cannulae than with 16-G metal needles at blood flow rates of 280, 300, and 330 mL/min. Similar results were obtained for 15-G metal needles and 16-G plastic cannulae at a blood flow rate of 330 mL/min. However, the patient ratings of pain on a visual analogue scale were higher for plastic cannulae. Conclusion: Higher substitution volumes were obtained at the same prescribed blood flow rate with plastic cannulae than with metal needles during online hemodiafiltration. Plastic cannulae are an option for achieving high-volume hemodiafiltration for patients with low blood flow rates.

Background: This study aimed to investigate the effect of a forest healing program on psychological and physiological changes in employees exposed to work-related stress. Methods: This study included 38 employees whose workplaces were located in Naju and Jeonnam. They were given a set of forest healing programs. They completed self-rating scales to assess changes in anxiety, depression, and workrelated stress. Salivary cortisol levels, electroencephalography changes, and photoplethysmography components were also assessed. The mean differences in these parameters before and after treatment were analyzed. Results: The mean ages of male and female employees were different (p<0.010). After controlling for age as a covariate, all variables were examined for main and sex-associated effects using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance. Although the mean changes in saliva cortisol levels were significantly lower after treatment, the sex-associated and interaction effects were found to be insignificant. Conclusion Although the short-term forest healing program did not provide notable results, it may have beneficial effects on certain psychological and physiological aspects. Further studies are warranted to determine the feasibility of the forest healing program as a suitable stress management strategy for employees.

Given the progressive improvements in antithrombotic strategies, management of cardiovascular disease has become sophisticated/refined. However, the optimal perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome or who are scheduled for percutaneous coronary intervention remains unclear. Assessments of the thrombotic and hemorrhagic risks are essential to reduce the rates of mortality and major cardiac events. However, the existing guidelines do not mention these topics. This case-based consensus document deals with common clinical scenarios and offers evidence-based guidelines for individualized perioperative management of antithrombotic therapy in the real world.

The prevalence of ischemic heart disease is steadily growing as populations age. Antithrombotic treatment is a key therapeutic modality for the prevention of secondary cerebro-cardiovascular disease. Patients with acute coronary syndrome or who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention must be treated with dual antiplatelet therapy for a mandatory period. The optimal perioperative antithrombotic regimen remains debatable; antithrombotics can cause bleeding. Inadequate antithrombotic regimens are associated with perioperative ischemic events, but continuation of therapy may increase the risks of perioperative hemorrhagic complications (including mortality). Many guidelines on the perioperative management of antithrombotic agents have been established by academic societies. However, the existing guidelines do not cover all specialties, nor do they describe the thrombotic and hemorrhagic risks associated with various surgical interventions. Moreover, few practical recommendations on the modification of antithrombotic regimens in patients who require non-deferrable interventions/surgeries or procedures associated with a high risk of hemorrhage have appeared. Therefore, cardiologists, specialists performing invasive procedures, surgeons, dentists, and anesthesiologists have not come to a consensus on optimal perioperative antithrombotic regimens. The Korean Platelet-Thrombosis Research Group presented a positioning paper on perioperative antithrombotic management. We here discuss commonly encountered clinical scenarios and engage in evidence-based discussion to assist individualized, perioperative antithrombotic management in clinical practice.

Background and Objectives: With the growing acknowledgment of age-related vestibular impairments, consensus diagnostic criteria for presbyvestibulopathy (PVP) have been recently published. The PVP criteria retains its objectivity with video head impulse test (vHIT), rotatory chair test (RCT) and caloric test. These objective tests share testing principles, but targeted frequencies vary across the tests. The PVP criteria are applicable for subjects of age over 60. However, there are different age cut-offs for older male in different areas. The purpose of the present study was to explore whether the PVP diagnostic criteria were appropriate for early elderly (Eel) patients and to identify the most sensitive test for age-related loss of vestibular function.Subjects and Method Eligible patients, aged 60 years or older, complained of dizziness for at least 3 weeks, and have undergone at least one of the followings: vHIT, RCT, or caloric test. We selected two groups based on age: the Eel group (aged >60 years but <65 years) and the late elderly (Lel) group (aged ≥75 years). Results: The vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) gains differed significantly between the Eel and Lel groups for vHIT and caloric gain test. No Eel patient met the PVP criteria but 26.1% of Lel patients met the criteria for vHIT, and the proportions of such patients in the two groups differed significantly. Conclusion Eel subjects could be considered to differ from Lel subjects. Given the significance of both averages, VOR difference and the proportional difference in terms of meeting the PVP criteria and vHIT may be optimal when evaluating age-related changes.