Primary breast lymphoma is a rare malignant breast tumor, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers. Among them, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is the most common histologic subtype.However, primary mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma is less common and more indolent than diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and primary MALT lymphoma of the breast is extremely rare. We report a case of bilateral breast cancer in a 62-year-old woman with primary MALT lymphoma in right braest and contralateral invasive breast cancer in left breast. The patient presented with a palpable right breast lump, which appeared as a noncalcified mass on mammography and an indistinct irregular hypoechoic mass with internal vascularity on breast ultrasonography. The mass was pathologically confirmed by excisional biopsy as primary MALT lymphoma. The patient underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI, which additionally detected a small suspicious mass in the left breast. This was a clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer diagnosed as invasive ductal carcinoma.

Primary breast lymphoma is a rare malignant breast tumor, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers. Among them, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is the most common histologic subtype.However, primary mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma is less common and more indolent than diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and primary MALT lymphoma of the breast is extremely rare. We report a case of bilateral breast cancer in a 62-year-old woman with primary MALT lymphoma in right braest and contralateral invasive breast cancer in left breast. The patient presented with a palpable right breast lump, which appeared as a noncalcified mass on mammography and an indistinct irregular hypoechoic mass with internal vascularity on breast ultrasonography. The mass was pathologically confirmed by excisional biopsy as primary MALT lymphoma. The patient underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI, which additionally detected a small suspicious mass in the left breast. This was a clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer diagnosed as invasive ductal carcinoma.

Primary breast lymphoma is a rare malignant breast tumor, accounting for <1% of all breast cancers. Among them, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is the most common histologic subtype.However, primary mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma is less common and more indolent than diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and primary MALT lymphoma of the breast is extremely rare. We report a case of bilateral breast cancer in a 62-year-old woman with primary MALT lymphoma in right braest and contralateral invasive breast cancer in left breast. The patient presented with a palpable right breast lump, which appeared as a noncalcified mass on mammography and an indistinct irregular hypoechoic mass with internal vascularity on breast ultrasonography. The mass was pathologically confirmed by excisional biopsy as primary MALT lymphoma. The patient underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI, which additionally detected a small suspicious mass in the left breast. This was a clinically and mammographically occult breast cancer diagnosed as invasive ductal carcinoma.

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.

Purpose: This study aimed to improve the reimbursement policies in the service of Korean Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) to enhance their utilization in practice. Methods: The study was conducted in three stages: 1) reviewing other countries’ APN systems; 2) conducting focus group interviews and online surveys with APNs to gather opinions on their roles, practices, and reimbursement status; and 3) proposal for improving reimbursement policies based on expert consultations. The data was collected between March and June 2023. Results: In the United States, APNs can be reimbursed at 85~100 % of physician fees for services provided under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. In Japan, reimbursement is only available for 38 tasks performed among specially trained Certified Nurses. Master’s level APN education has been created but not nationally legislated. The results of focus group interviews reveal low awareness and legal limitations of Korean APNs’ roles. The results of online surveys indicate high professional pride but low satisfaction with little reimbursement system, and 71.4% of respondents denote the APN field’s integration. Also, expansion of current reimbursement to other APN fields and regular evaluation of roles and reimbursement were recommended. Conclusion In this study, it is necessary to clarify APNs’ roles, and scope of practice, and establish benefits and reimbursement systems for professional APNs’ health services. This study suggests improvements to enhance the Korean APN system and healthcare quality in Korea.

Purpose: This study aimed to improve the reimbursement policies in the service of Korean Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) to enhance their utilization in practice. Methods: The study was conducted in three stages: 1) reviewing other countries’ APN systems; 2) conducting focus group interviews and online surveys with APNs to gather opinions on their roles, practices, and reimbursement status; and 3) proposal for improving reimbursement policies based on expert consultations. The data was collected between March and June 2023. Results: In the United States, APNs can be reimbursed at 85~100 % of physician fees for services provided under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. In Japan, reimbursement is only available for 38 tasks performed among specially trained Certified Nurses. Master’s level APN education has been created but not nationally legislated. The results of focus group interviews reveal low awareness and legal limitations of Korean APNs’ roles. The results of online surveys indicate high professional pride but low satisfaction with little reimbursement system, and 71.4% of respondents denote the APN field’s integration. Also, expansion of current reimbursement to other APN fields and regular evaluation of roles and reimbursement were recommended. Conclusion In this study, it is necessary to clarify APNs’ roles, and scope of practice, and establish benefits and reimbursement systems for professional APNs’ health services. This study suggests improvements to enhance the Korean APN system and healthcare quality in Korea.

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.

Purpose: This study aimed to improve the reimbursement policies in the service of Korean Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) to enhance their utilization in practice. Methods: The study was conducted in three stages: 1) reviewing other countries’ APN systems; 2) conducting focus group interviews and online surveys with APNs to gather opinions on their roles, practices, and reimbursement status; and 3) proposal for improving reimbursement policies based on expert consultations. The data was collected between March and June 2023. Results: In the United States, APNs can be reimbursed at 85~100 % of physician fees for services provided under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. In Japan, reimbursement is only available for 38 tasks performed among specially trained Certified Nurses. Master’s level APN education has been created but not nationally legislated. The results of focus group interviews reveal low awareness and legal limitations of Korean APNs’ roles. The results of online surveys indicate high professional pride but low satisfaction with little reimbursement system, and 71.4% of respondents denote the APN field’s integration. Also, expansion of current reimbursement to other APN fields and regular evaluation of roles and reimbursement were recommended. Conclusion In this study, it is necessary to clarify APNs’ roles, and scope of practice, and establish benefits and reimbursement systems for professional APNs’ health services. This study suggests improvements to enhance the Korean APN system and healthcare quality in Korea.

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.