Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: The stimulatory effects of caffeine contribute to poor sleep quality. However, the relationship between caffeinated beverages and sleep quality, considering frequency or types of caffeinated beverages, were not extensively studied. Methods: Data were collected from 160 urban workers (75 men [46.9%] aged 20–69 years; with an average age of 41.8±12.3 years) using a structured, self-administered online questionnaire. Sleep quality, time, satisfaction; types and frequency of caffeinated beverages (number of cups per week; Q1: 0 cup, Q4: 14 or more cups per week), demographics, and health behaviors were asked. Sleep quality were evaluated using the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K). Multiple regression analysis was conducted on the association between the frequency of caffeinated beverages consumption and sleep quality. Results: The most frequently consumed beverages were unsweetened coffee (22.8%) and the most common time for caffeine was between 12 pm to 5 pm (58.2%). The average sleep quality score based on the PSQI-K was 6.0±2.0 overall, 5.3±1.6 in Q1, and 6.6±2.2 in Q4 (frequent caffeinated beverage drinkers), indicating poorer sleep quality in Q4 (P=0.022). In Q1, 13.3% rated their sleep quality as ‘very good,’ while in Q4, only 2.5% gave the same rating. Poor sleep quality was significantly associated with the frequency of caffeinated beverages per week (β=0.232, P=0.004) and self-reported stress level (β=0.256, P=0.002). Conclusions Frequent consumption of caffeinated beverages appears to be associated with poor sleep quality among urban workers. While reducing caffeine intake may contribute to improvements in sleep quality as a health promoting behavior, this hypothesis requires validation through future studies employing personalized intervention approaches.

Background: Commuting is essential for working life; however, prolonged travel times can negatively affect health, particularly musculoskeletal pain. This study aims to examine the relationship between commuting time and musculoskeletal pain (back, upper extremity, and lower extremity pain), in the context of working time. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the Sixth Korean Working Conditions Survey conducted in Korea between October 2020 and April 2021. Variables such as commuting time, weekly working hours, and shift work were assessed using the survey questions. Musculoskeletal pain was determined based on self-reported pains in the previous year. The covariates included demographics, employment status, ergonomic risks, and job stress. The association between commuting time and musculoskeletal pain stratified by weekly working hours or shift work was analyzed by survey-weighted logistic regression analysis. Results: This study found a significant association between longer commuting times and increased prevalence of musculoskeletal pain, particularly back, upper extremity, and lower extremity pain. When commuting time was ≤60, 61–120, >120 minutes, the odds ratio was 1.00, 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16–1.52), and 2.41 (95% CI: 1.77–3.29) for back pain; 1.00, 1.29 (95% CI: 1.13–1.46), and 2.27 (95% CI: 1.71–3.00) for upper extremity pain; and 1.00, 1.24 (95% CI: 1.05–1.45), and 1.53 (95% CI: 1.13–2.08) for lower extremity pain, respectively. Furthermore, except for upper extremity pain, this trend was amplified when participants were concurrently exposed to long working hours, and for lower extremity pain, this trend was aggravated among shift workers. Conclusions Long commuting time may be a risk factor for musculoskeletal pain, and its’ effects could be aggravated when combined with long working hours or shift work. This study observed the detrimental impact of prolonged commuting on musculoskeletal health, particularly among employees with extended working hours or shift work.

Background: The stimulatory effects of caffeine contribute to poor sleep quality. However, the relationship between caffeinated beverages and sleep quality, considering frequency or types of caffeinated beverages, were not extensively studied. Methods: Data were collected from 160 urban workers (75 men [46.9%] aged 20–69 years; with an average age of 41.8±12.3 years) using a structured, self-administered online questionnaire. Sleep quality, time, satisfaction; types and frequency of caffeinated beverages (number of cups per week; Q1: 0 cup, Q4: 14 or more cups per week), demographics, and health behaviors were asked. Sleep quality were evaluated using the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K). Multiple regression analysis was conducted on the association between the frequency of caffeinated beverages consumption and sleep quality. Results: The most frequently consumed beverages were unsweetened coffee (22.8%) and the most common time for caffeine was between 12 pm to 5 pm (58.2%). The average sleep quality score based on the PSQI-K was 6.0±2.0 overall, 5.3±1.6 in Q1, and 6.6±2.2 in Q4 (frequent caffeinated beverage drinkers), indicating poorer sleep quality in Q4 (P=0.022). In Q1, 13.3% rated their sleep quality as ‘very good,’ while in Q4, only 2.5% gave the same rating. Poor sleep quality was significantly associated with the frequency of caffeinated beverages per week (β=0.232, P=0.004) and self-reported stress level (β=0.256, P=0.002). Conclusions Frequent consumption of caffeinated beverages appears to be associated with poor sleep quality among urban workers. While reducing caffeine intake may contribute to improvements in sleep quality as a health promoting behavior, this hypothesis requires validation through future studies employing personalized intervention approaches.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Background: Commuting is essential for working life; however, prolonged travel times can negatively affect health, particularly musculoskeletal pain. This study aims to examine the relationship between commuting time and musculoskeletal pain (back, upper extremity, and lower extremity pain), in the context of working time. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the Sixth Korean Working Conditions Survey conducted in Korea between October 2020 and April 2021. Variables such as commuting time, weekly working hours, and shift work were assessed using the survey questions. Musculoskeletal pain was determined based on self-reported pains in the previous year. The covariates included demographics, employment status, ergonomic risks, and job stress. The association between commuting time and musculoskeletal pain stratified by weekly working hours or shift work was analyzed by survey-weighted logistic regression analysis. Results: This study found a significant association between longer commuting times and increased prevalence of musculoskeletal pain, particularly back, upper extremity, and lower extremity pain. When commuting time was ≤60, 61–120, >120 minutes, the odds ratio was 1.00, 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16–1.52), and 2.41 (95% CI: 1.77–3.29) for back pain; 1.00, 1.29 (95% CI: 1.13–1.46), and 2.27 (95% CI: 1.71–3.00) for upper extremity pain; and 1.00, 1.24 (95% CI: 1.05–1.45), and 1.53 (95% CI: 1.13–2.08) for lower extremity pain, respectively. Furthermore, except for upper extremity pain, this trend was amplified when participants were concurrently exposed to long working hours, and for lower extremity pain, this trend was aggravated among shift workers. Conclusions Long commuting time may be a risk factor for musculoskeletal pain, and its’ effects could be aggravated when combined with long working hours or shift work. This study observed the detrimental impact of prolonged commuting on musculoskeletal health, particularly among employees with extended working hours or shift work.

Purpose: This study evaluated the postoperative quality of life (QoL) after various types of gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in Korea using the Korean Quality of Life in Stomach Cancer Patients Study (KOQUSS)-40, a new QoL assessment tool focusing on postgastrectomy syndrome. Overall, 496 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled, and QoL was assessed at 5 time points: preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: Distal gastrectomy (DG) and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) showed significantly better outcomes than total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) with regard to total score, indigestion, and dysphagia. DG, PPG, and TG also showed significantly better outcomes than PG in terms of dumping syndrome and worry about cancer. Postoperative QoL did not differ significantly according to anastomosis type in DG, except for Billroth I anastomosis, which achieved better bowel habit change scores than the others. No domains differed significantly when comparing double tract reconstruction and esophagogastrostomy after PG. The total QoL score correlated significantly with postoperative body weight loss (more than 10%) and extent of resection (P<0.05 for both).Reflux as assessed by KOQUSS-40 did not correlate significantly with reflux observed on gastroscopy 1 year postoperatively (P=0.064). Conclusions Our prospective observation using KOQUSS-40 revealed that DG and PPG lead to better QoL than TG and PG. Further study is needed to compare postoperative QoL according to anastomosis type in DG and PG.

Background: Understanding disparities in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes between people with disabilities (PwD) and people without disabilities (PwoD) is crucial, particularly when considering the heterogeneity within PwD and age differences.This study aimed to compare severe COVID-19 outcomes including deaths between PwD and PwoD with analyses stratified by age group and further examined by disability type. Methods: This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked data from national COVID-19 cases and health insurance for individuals aged ≥ 19 years with COVID-19 from January 2020 to October 2022 in the Republic of Korea. Severe outcomes included severe cases and deaths, with logistic regression analysis of the risk disparities between PwD and PwoD based on age group and disability types. The subgroup analysis considered epidemic periods, accounting for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulation. Results: The risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and deaths among PwD varied by age and disability type. While severe outcomes were most prevalent in the older age groups for both PwD and PwoD, younger PwD faced a markedly higher risk—up to eightfold—compared to PwoD. The risk of disability status was greater than that of comorbidities in the 19–39 age group. Among disability types, individuals with internal organs-related and intellectual disabilities showed higher risk disparities with PwoD in severe outcomes than other types of disabilities. Throughout the pandemic, the disparity in death risk remained similar, with a slight increase in disparity during the omicron period for all severe outcomes in the age groups 19–39 and 40–64 years. Conclusion Prioritizing younger PwD, along with older age groups and people with comorbidities, is crucial in addressing public health crises. Risk-based prioritization is important to reduce overall risk. This includes prioritizing people with nternal organs-related and intellectural disabilities, who face higher health risks among PwD during a pandemic when resources are limited and time is of the essence.

Background: The stimulatory effects of caffeine contribute to poor sleep quality. However, the relationship between caffeinated beverages and sleep quality, considering frequency or types of caffeinated beverages, were not extensively studied. Methods: Data were collected from 160 urban workers (75 men [46.9%] aged 20–69 years; with an average age of 41.8±12.3 years) using a structured, self-administered online questionnaire. Sleep quality, time, satisfaction; types and frequency of caffeinated beverages (number of cups per week; Q1: 0 cup, Q4: 14 or more cups per week), demographics, and health behaviors were asked. Sleep quality were evaluated using the Korean version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI-K). Multiple regression analysis was conducted on the association between the frequency of caffeinated beverages consumption and sleep quality. Results: The most frequently consumed beverages were unsweetened coffee (22.8%) and the most common time for caffeine was between 12 pm to 5 pm (58.2%). The average sleep quality score based on the PSQI-K was 6.0±2.0 overall, 5.3±1.6 in Q1, and 6.6±2.2 in Q4 (frequent caffeinated beverage drinkers), indicating poorer sleep quality in Q4 (P=0.022). In Q1, 13.3% rated their sleep quality as ‘very good,’ while in Q4, only 2.5% gave the same rating. Poor sleep quality was significantly associated with the frequency of caffeinated beverages per week (β=0.232, P=0.004) and self-reported stress level (β=0.256, P=0.002). Conclusions Frequent consumption of caffeinated beverages appears to be associated with poor sleep quality among urban workers. While reducing caffeine intake may contribute to improvements in sleep quality as a health promoting behavior, this hypothesis requires validation through future studies employing personalized intervention approaches.