Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: Effective triage of febrile patients in the emergency department is crucial during times of overcrowding to prioritize care and allocate resources, especially during pandemics. However, available triage tools often require laboratory data and lack accuracy. We aimed to develop a simple and accurate triage tool for febrile patients by modifying the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 7,303 febrile patients and created modified versions of qSOFA using factors identified through multivariable analysis. The performance of these modified qSOFAs in predicting in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: Through multivariable analysis, the identified factors were age (“A” factor), male sex (“M” factor), oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2; “S” factor), and lactate level (“L” factor). The AUROCs of ASqSOFA (in-hospital mortality: 0.812 [95% confidence interval, 0.789–0.835]; ICU admission: 0.794 [95% confidence interval, 0.771–0.817]) were simple and not inferior to those of other more complex models (e.g., ASMqSOFA, ASLqSOFA, and ASMLqSOFA). ASqSOFA also displayed significantly higher AUROC than other triage scales, such as the Modified Early Warning Score and Korean Triage and Acuity Scale. The optimal cutoff score of ASqSOFA for the outcome was 2, and the score for redistribution to a lower level emergency department was 0. Conclusion We demonstrated that ASqSOFA can be employed as a simple and efficient triage tool for emergency febrile patients to aid in resource distribution during overcrowding. It also may be applicable in prehospital settings for febrile patient triage.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: Effective triage of febrile patients in the emergency department is crucial during times of overcrowding to prioritize care and allocate resources, especially during pandemics. However, available triage tools often require laboratory data and lack accuracy. We aimed to develop a simple and accurate triage tool for febrile patients by modifying the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 7,303 febrile patients and created modified versions of qSOFA using factors identified through multivariable analysis. The performance of these modified qSOFAs in predicting in-hospital mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Results: Through multivariable analysis, the identified factors were age (“A” factor), male sex (“M” factor), oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2; “S” factor), and lactate level (“L” factor). The AUROCs of ASqSOFA (in-hospital mortality: 0.812 [95% confidence interval, 0.789–0.835]; ICU admission: 0.794 [95% confidence interval, 0.771–0.817]) were simple and not inferior to those of other more complex models (e.g., ASMqSOFA, ASLqSOFA, and ASMLqSOFA). ASqSOFA also displayed significantly higher AUROC than other triage scales, such as the Modified Early Warning Score and Korean Triage and Acuity Scale. The optimal cutoff score of ASqSOFA for the outcome was 2, and the score for redistribution to a lower level emergency department was 0. Conclusion We demonstrated that ASqSOFA can be employed as a simple and efficient triage tool for emergency febrile patients to aid in resource distribution during overcrowding. It also may be applicable in prehospital settings for febrile patient triage.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.