OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

OBJECTIVES: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are communal environments for patients with chronic diseases or older adults, making them particularly susceptible to significant harm during infectious disease outbreaks. Nonetheless, LTCFs have historically been subject to less stringent infection prevention and control (IPC) mandates. This study aimed to assess the current state of LTCFs and to develop an IPC system tailored for these facilities following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of 11,366 LTCFs in Korea from December 30, 2022 to January 20, 2023, to evaluate the components of IPC in LTCFs. The infectious diseases targeted for IPC included COVID-19, influenza, and scabies. Additionally, we compared institution-based and home-based long-term care insurance facilities. RESULTS: Overall, 3,537 (31.1%) LTCFs responded to the survey, comprising 1,819 (51.4%) institution-based and 1,718 (48.6%) home-based facilities. A majority (87.4%, 2,376/2,720) of these facilities experienced COVID-19 outbreaks. However, only 42.2% of home-based facilities, in contrast to 90.6% of institution-based facilities, were equipped to manage concurrent COVID-19 cases. Similarly, while 92.1% of institution-based facilities were capable of managing influenza, only 50.5% of home-based facilities could do the same. The incidence of scabies was significantly higher in institution-based facilities than in home-based ones (26.1 vs. 4.3%). Additionally, 88.7% of institution-based facilities managed scabies cases effectively, compared to only 42.1% of home-based facilities. CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of the LTCFs had a basic capacity to respond to infectious diseases. However, there were differences in response capabilities between institution-based facilities and home-based facilities.

Background: Early and appropriate diagnosis of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) is clinically important because aMCI is considered the prodromal stage of dementia caused by Alzheimer’s disease (AD). aMCI is assessed using the comprehensive neuropsychological (NP) battery, but it is rater-dependent and does not provide quick results. Thus, we investigated the performance of the computerized cognitive screening test (Inbrain Cognitive Screening Test; Inbrain CST) in the diagnosis of aMCI and compared its performance to that of the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease (CERAD) test (CERAD-K), a comprehensive and pencil-and-paper NP test. Methods: A total of 166 participants were included in this cross-sectional study. The participants were recruited as part of a prospective, community-based cohort study for MCI (PREcision medicine platform for mild cognitive impairment on multi-omics, imaging, evidence-based R&BD; PREMIER). All participants were assessed using the CERAD-K and the Inbrain CST. The Inbrain CST comprised seven subtests that assessed the following five cognitive domains: attention, language, visuospatial, memory, and executive functions. Seventy-six participants underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging and [ 18 F]-flutemetamol positron emission tomography (PET). We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Inbrain CST for the identification of aMCI by comparing the findings with those of CERAD-K. We also determined the characteristics of aMCI patients as defined by the CERAD-K and Inbrain CST. Results: Of the 166 participants, 93 were diagnosed with aMCI, while 73 were cognitively unimpaired. The sensitivity of the Inbrain CST for aMCI diagnosis was 81.7%, and its specificity was 84.9%. Positive and negative predictive values were 87.4% and 78.5%, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was 83.1%, and the error rate was 16.9%. Demographic and clinical characteristics between individuals with aMCI defined by the Inbrain CST and CERAD-K were not significantly different. The frequency of positive amyloid PET scan, the hippocampal/ parahippocampal volumes, and AD signature cortical thickness did not differ between the patients with aMCI defined by CERAD-K and those with aMCI defined by the Inbrain CST. Conclusion The Inbrain CST showed sufficient sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for diagnosing objective memory impairment in aMCI. In addition, aMCI patients identified by CERAD-K and the Inbrain CST showed comparable clinical and neuroimaging characteristics. Therefore, the Inbrain CST can be considered an alternative test to supplement the limitations of existing pencil-and-paper NP tests.

Crohn’s disease (CD) is a relapsing and progressive condition characterized by diarrhea, abdominal pain, weight loss, and hematochezia that results in serious complications such as perforations, fistulas, and abscesses. Various medications, interventions, and surgical treatments have been used to treat CD. The Korean guidelines for CD management were distributed in 2012 and revised in 2017 by the Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Research Group of the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases. Substantial progress in mucosal immunologic research has elucidated the pathophysiology of IBD, leading to development of biological agents for treatment of CD. The first developed biologic agent, tumor necrosis factor-α agents, were shown to be efficacious in CD, heralding a new era in management of CD. Subsequently, vedolizumab, a monoclonal antibody against integrin α4β7, and ustekinumab, a human monoclonal antibody that inhibits the common p40 subunit of interleukin-12 and interleukin-23, were both approved for clinical use and are efficacious and safe for both induction and maintenance of remission in moderate-to-severe CD patients. Moreover, a recent study showed the non-inferiority of CT-P13, an infliximab biosimilar, compared with infliximab in CD patients. The third Korean guidelines for CD management provide updated information regarding treatment of moderate-to-severe CD patients with biologic agents.

Background: A study on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) phobia among students revealed that fear of contracting COVID-19 was associated with commuting to school and spending time with others at school. Therefore, it is the need-of-the-hour for the Korean government to identify factors affecting COVID-19 phobia among university students and to consider these factors while framing the policy direction for the process of returning to normalcy in university education. Consequently, we aimed to identify the current state of COVID-19 phobia among Korean undergraduate and graduate students and the factors affecting COVID-19 phobia. Methods: This cross-sectional survey was conducted to identify the factors affecting COVID-19 phobia among Korean undergraduate and graduate students. The survey collected 460 responses from April 5 to April 16, 2022. The questionnaire was developed based on the COVID-19 Phobia Scale (C19P-S). Multiple linear regression was performed on the C19P-S scores using five models with the following dependent variables: Model 1, total C19P-S score; Model 2, psychological subscale score; Model 3, psychosomatic subscale score; Model 4, social subscale score; and Model 5, economic subscale score. The fit of these five models was established, and a P-value of less than 0.05 (F test) was considered statistically significant. Results: An analysis of the factors affecting the total C19P-S score led to the following findings: women significantly outscored men (difference: 4.826 points, P = 0.003); the group that favored the government’s COVID-19 mitigation policy scored significantly lower than those who did not favor it (difference: 3.161 points, P = 0.037); the group that avoided crowded places scored significantly higher than the group that did not avoid crowded places (difference: 7.200 points, P < 0.001); and those living with family/friends scored significantly higher than those in other living situations (difference: 4.606 points, P = 0.021). Those in favor of the COVID-19 mitigation policy had significantly lower psychological fear than those who were against it (difference: -1.686 points, P = 0.004). Psychological fear was also significantly higher for those who avoided crowded places compared to those who did not difference: 2.641 points, P < 0.001). Fear was significantly higher in people cohabitating than those living alone (difference: 1.543 points, P= 0.043). Conclusion The Korean government, in their pursuit of a policy that eases COVID-19-related restrictions, will also have to spare no efforts in providing correct information to prevent the escalation of COVID-19 phobia among people with a high fear of contracting the disease. This should be done through trustworthy information sources, such as the media, public agencies, and COVID-19 professionals.

The tongue is one of the most common sites of oral cancer. Glossectomy is known as the gold standard for tongue cancer treatment. However, surgical removal can lead to reduced mobility of the tongue and the patients may have difficulty performing normal oral functions like swallowing and pronunciation. Therefore, additional prosthetic consideration to supplement the function of the impaired tongue is needed for oral rehabilitation of such patients. Palatal augmentation prosthesis helps the tongue to reach the palate by lowering the position of the palatal polished surface. The oral functions of the patients with limited tongue mobility can be improved by the prosthesis. In this case, palatal augmented maxillary denture and conventional mandibular denture were fabricated for the completely edentulous patient with reduced tongue mobility after glossectomy due to tongue cancer. As a result, the oral functions of the patient were improved with the prosthesis.

Background: Contemporary data on vision impairment form an important basis for public health policies. However, most data on the clinical epidemiology of blindness are limited by small sample sizes and focused not on systemic conditions but ophthalmic diseases only. In this study, we examined the ten-year trends of blindness prevalence and its correlation with systemic health status in Korean adults. Methods: This study investigated 10,000,000 participants randomly extracted from the entire Korean population (aged ≥ 20 years) who underwent a National Health Insurance Service health checkup between 2009 and 2018. Participants with blindness, defined as visual acuity in the better-seeing eye of ≤ 20/200, were identified. The prevalence of blindness was assessed, and the systemic health status was compared between participants with blindness and without blindness. Results: The mean prevalence of blindness was 0.473% (47,115 blindness cases) and tended to decrease over ten years (0.586% in 2009 and 0.348% in 2018; P < 0.001). The following factors were significantly associated with blindness: female sex, underweight (body mass index < 18.5), high serum creatinine (> 1.5 mg/dL), and bilateral hearing loss. In addition, except for those aged 30–39 and 40–49 years, high fasting glucose (≥ 126 mg/dL) and low hemoglobin (male: < 12 g/dL, female: < 10 g/dL) were significantly correlated with prevalent blindness. Conclusion Our ten-year Korean nationwide population-based study suggested a gradual decrease in the prevalence of blindness and its association with specific systemic health status. These conditions might be the cause or consequence of blindness and can be used as a reference for the prevention and/or rehabilitation of blindness to establish public health policies.