Background/Aims: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and high-risk examinees increases, the incidence of adverse events associated with these endoscopies has also increased. Medical disputes and lawsuits related to adverse events are rapidly increasing. Methods: Medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy that had been filed in Korean Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency (K-medi) from April 2012 to August 2020 were evaluated with the corresponding medical records and written appraisal. Facilities, patients, procedures, adverse events, and outcome-related variables related to medical disputes were analyzed. Results: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in Korea increases each year, the number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy appraised by K-medi has also increased yearly during the same period. Among the 121 cases analyzed, 86 (71.1%) were conciliated and 35 (28.9%) were cosigned by prosecution. Perforations accounted for the largest proportion of cases (93 cases, 76.9%). Most patients (n = 119, 98.3%) underwent non-emergent procedures, and only 10 (8.3%) underwent them for therapeutic purposes. Approximately one-fifth of the patients (n = 25, 20.7%) died. Conclusions The number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are increasing. To prevent this, it is important to review the data on existing cases and establish specific response guidelines.

Background/Aims: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and high-risk examinees increases, the incidence of adverse events associated with these endoscopies has also increased. Medical disputes and lawsuits related to adverse events are rapidly increasing. Methods: Medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy that had been filed in Korean Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency (K-medi) from April 2012 to August 2020 were evaluated with the corresponding medical records and written appraisal. Facilities, patients, procedures, adverse events, and outcome-related variables related to medical disputes were analyzed. Results: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in Korea increases each year, the number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy appraised by K-medi has also increased yearly during the same period. Among the 121 cases analyzed, 86 (71.1%) were conciliated and 35 (28.9%) were cosigned by prosecution. Perforations accounted for the largest proportion of cases (93 cases, 76.9%). Most patients (n = 119, 98.3%) underwent non-emergent procedures, and only 10 (8.3%) underwent them for therapeutic purposes. Approximately one-fifth of the patients (n = 25, 20.7%) died. Conclusions The number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are increasing. To prevent this, it is important to review the data on existing cases and establish specific response guidelines.

Background/Aims: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and high-risk examinees increases, the incidence of adverse events associated with these endoscopies has also increased. Medical disputes and lawsuits related to adverse events are rapidly increasing. Methods: Medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy that had been filed in Korean Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency (K-medi) from April 2012 to August 2020 were evaluated with the corresponding medical records and written appraisal. Facilities, patients, procedures, adverse events, and outcome-related variables related to medical disputes were analyzed. Results: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in Korea increases each year, the number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy appraised by K-medi has also increased yearly during the same period. Among the 121 cases analyzed, 86 (71.1%) were conciliated and 35 (28.9%) were cosigned by prosecution. Perforations accounted for the largest proportion of cases (93 cases, 76.9%). Most patients (n = 119, 98.3%) underwent non-emergent procedures, and only 10 (8.3%) underwent them for therapeutic purposes. Approximately one-fifth of the patients (n = 25, 20.7%) died. Conclusions The number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are increasing. To prevent this, it is important to review the data on existing cases and establish specific response guidelines.

Background/Aims: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and high-risk examinees increases, the incidence of adverse events associated with these endoscopies has also increased. Medical disputes and lawsuits related to adverse events are rapidly increasing. Methods: Medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy that had been filed in Korean Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency (K-medi) from April 2012 to August 2020 were evaluated with the corresponding medical records and written appraisal. Facilities, patients, procedures, adverse events, and outcome-related variables related to medical disputes were analyzed. Results: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in Korea increases each year, the number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy appraised by K-medi has also increased yearly during the same period. Among the 121 cases analyzed, 86 (71.1%) were conciliated and 35 (28.9%) were cosigned by prosecution. Perforations accounted for the largest proportion of cases (93 cases, 76.9%). Most patients (n = 119, 98.3%) underwent non-emergent procedures, and only 10 (8.3%) underwent them for therapeutic purposes. Approximately one-fifth of the patients (n = 25, 20.7%) died. Conclusions The number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are increasing. To prevent this, it is important to review the data on existing cases and establish specific response guidelines.

Background/Aims: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies and high-risk examinees increases, the incidence of adverse events associated with these endoscopies has also increased. Medical disputes and lawsuits related to adverse events are rapidly increasing. Methods: Medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy that had been filed in Korean Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency (K-medi) from April 2012 to August 2020 were evaluated with the corresponding medical records and written appraisal. Facilities, patients, procedures, adverse events, and outcome-related variables related to medical disputes were analyzed. Results: As the number of lower gastrointestinal endoscopies in Korea increases each year, the number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy appraised by K-medi has also increased yearly during the same period. Among the 121 cases analyzed, 86 (71.1%) were conciliated and 35 (28.9%) were cosigned by prosecution. Perforations accounted for the largest proportion of cases (93 cases, 76.9%). Most patients (n = 119, 98.3%) underwent non-emergent procedures, and only 10 (8.3%) underwent them for therapeutic purposes. Approximately one-fifth of the patients (n = 25, 20.7%) died. Conclusions The number of medical disputes related to lower gastrointestinal endoscopy are increasing. To prevent this, it is important to review the data on existing cases and establish specific response guidelines.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Successful liberation from mechanical ventilation is one of the most crucial processes in critical care because it is the first step by which a respiratory failure patient begins to transition out of the intensive care unit and return to their own life. Therefore, when devising appropriate strategies for removing mechanical ventilation, it is essential to consider not only the individual experiences of healthcare professionals, but also scientific and systematic approaches. Recently, numerous studies have investigated methods and tools for identifying when mechanically ventilated patients are ready to breathe on their own. The Korean Society of Critical Care Medicine therefore provides these recommendations to clinicians about liberation from the ventilator. Methods: Meta-analyses and comprehensive syntheses were used to thoroughly review, compile, and summarize the complete body of relevant evidence. All studies were meticulously assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method, and the outcomes were presented succinctly as evidence profiles. Those evidence syntheses were discussed by a multidisciplinary committee of experts in mechanical ventilation, who then developed and approved recommendations. Results: Recommendations for nine PICO (population, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions about ventilator liberation are presented in this document. This guideline includes seven conditional recommendations, one expert consensus recommendation, and one conditional deferred recommendation. Conclusions: We developed these clinical guidelines for mechanical ventilation liberation to provide meaningful recommendations. These guidelines reflect the best treatment for patients seeking liberation from mechanical ventilation.

Purpose: This study investigated the impact of the guide hole height on the accuracy of implant placement using CAD/ CAM-fabricated surgical guides in resin models. The hypothesis is that decreasing the height of the guide hole reduces placement accuracy. Materials and Methods: Ten identical partially edentulous maxillary models were each fitted with surgical guides featuring guide hole heights of 1 mm, 3 mm, and/or 5 mm. Using a surgical guide and drill kit, implants were placed in six predetermined sites per model. Placement accuracy was evaluated by comparing the actual implant positions with the planned positions using digital scanning and computer software analysis. Statistical analyses were performed using ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests to determine the significance of deviations at both the coronal and apical positions. Results: The average deviations were 0.75±0.33 mm at the coronal position and 1.10±0.51 mm at the apical position. Placement accuracy didnot differ with different guide hole heights. Additionally, errors were consistent regardless of the guide hole height and were not influenced by the type of support or the implant placement site. Conclusion In this rotro study, varying the height of the guide hole did not significantly affect the accuracy of implant placement. The results suggest that guide hole height within the tested range does not have a substantial impact on placement errors. Our findings indicate that factors other than the guide holeheight may play a more critical role in implant placement accuracy.