Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: The World Health Organization has declared the end of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency. However, this did not indicate the end of COVID-19. Several months after the infection, numerous patients complain of respiratory or nonspecific symptoms; this condition is called long COVID. Even patients with mild COVID-19 can experience long COVID, thus the burden of long COVID remains considerable. Therefore, we conducted this study to comprehensively analyze the effects of long COVID using multi-faceted assessments. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between February 2020 and September 2021 in six tertiary hospitals in Korea. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after discharge. Long COVID was defined as the persistence of three or more COVID-19-related symptoms. The primary outcome of this study was the prevalence of long COVID after the period of COVID-19. Results: During the study period, 290 patients were enrolled. Among them, 54.5 and 34.6% experienced long COVID within 6 months and after more than 18 months, respectively. Several patients showed abnormal results when tested for post-traumatic stress disorder (17.4%) and anxiety (31.9%) after 18 months. In patients who underwent follow-up chest computed tomography 18 months after COVID-19, abnormal findings remained at 51.9%. Males (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05–0.53; P=0.004) and elderly (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00–1.09; P=0.04) showed a significant association with long COVID after 12–18 months in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Conclusion Many patients still showed long COVID after 18 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection. When managing these patients, the assessment of multiple aspects is necessary.

Background: A decline in masticatory function may indicate brain dysfunction related to dementia, but the relationship between masticatory function and dementia risk remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether masticatory function is associated with the risk of cognitive decline and dementia. Methods: Data were obtained from the nationwide prospective cohort study of randomly sampled community-dwelling Koreans aged ≥ 60 years. The 5,064 non-demented participants, whose number of chewing cycles per bite was assessed by clinical interview, were followed for 8 years with biennial assessments of cognitive performance and clinical diagnoses of all-cause dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Structural brain magnetic resonance imaging was collected from a subset of cohort participants and their spouses for imaging analyses. Results: Males who chewed ≥ 30 cycles/bite had faster decline in global cognition and memory function and were at higher risk for incident all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18–7.18) and AD (HR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.14–9.11) compared to males with less than 10 cycles/bite. Additionally, increased chewing cycles in males were associated with reduced brain volume, particularly in regions involved in compensatory cognitive control of mastication. There was no significant association between chewing cycles and the risk of dementia or brain volume in females. Conclusion Older men who frequently chew their meals could be considered a notable population at risk for dementia who should be carefully assessed for their cognitive trajectories.

Objective: The Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson’s Disease–Cognition (SCOPA-Cog) was developed to assess cognition in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Korean version of the SCOPACog (K-SCOPA-Cog). Methods: We enrolled 129 PD patients with movement disorders from 31 clinics in South Korea. The original version of the SCOPA-Cog was translated into Korean using the translation-retranslation method. The test–retest method with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient were used to assess reliability. Spearman’s rank correlation analysis with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Korean version (MOCA-K) and the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) were used to assess concurrent validity. Results: The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.797, and the ICC was 0.887. Spearman’s rank correlation analysis revealed a significant correlation with the K-MMSE and MOCA-K scores (r = 0.546 and r = 0.683, respectively). Conclusion Our results demonstrate that the K-SCOPA-Cog has good reliability and validity.

This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning and the provision of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) in South Korea. We used data from the Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment service. In total, 44,361 patients with CO poisoning were identified across 10 years (2010–2019). The prevalence of CO poisoning was found to be 8.64/10,000 people, with a gradual annual increment. The highest prevalence was 11.01/10,000 individuals, among those aged 30–39 years. In 2010, HBOT was claimed from 15 hospitals, and increased to 30 hospitals in 2019. A total of 4,473 patients received HBOT in 10 years and 2,684 (60%) were treated for more than 2 hours. This study suggested that the prevalence of both CO poisoning and HBOT in Korea gradually increased over the past 10 years, and disparities in prevalence were observed by region.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to estimate the medical expenditures for poisoning patients in Korea using data from National Health Insurance and the Korea Health Panel Survey. Methods: The operational definition of poisoning was the presence of Korean Standard Classification of Diseases codes from T36 to T65. The number of poisoning patients, the amount of legal copayments, and benefit and non-benefit costs were extracted from both databases. The frequency of emergency, inpatient, and outpatient treatment utilization by poisoning patients was determined, and medical expenses were calculated. Linear regression analyses were performed to investigate factors affecting the medical expenses of poisoning patients. Results: The number of poisoning patients increased from 97,965 in 2011 to 147,984 persons in 2020. Medical expenses also increased by 74% from Korean won (KRW) 30.1 billion to KRW 52.3 billion, and benefit costs also increased by 79%. The average outpatient cost per person was KRW 67,660, and the inpatient cost was KRW 1,485,103. The average non-benefit medical expenses were KRW 80,298, accounting for about 16.2% of the total expenses. Multivariable analysis showed that the total expenditure was associated with economic status and disabilities. Conclusion The average medical expenditure per poisoning patient was KRW 534,302 in 2020, and poisoning-related costs gradually increased during the study period. Further research on the economic burden of poisoning should include indirect costs and reflect disease-adjusted life years.

Purpose: Most bee sting injuries are benign, although sometimes they can result in life threatening outcomes, such as anaphylaxis and death. The purpose of this study was to investigate the epidemiologic status of bee sting injuries in Korea and to identify risk factors associated with severe systemic reactions (SSRs). Materials and Methods: Cases were extracted from a multicenter retrospective registry for patients who had visited emergency departments (EDs) for bee sting injuries. SSRs were defined as hypotension or altered mental status upon ED arrival, hospitalization, or death. Patient demographics and injury characteristics were compared between SSR and non-SSR groups. Logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors for bee sting-associated SSRs, and the characteristics of fatality cases were summarized. Results: Among the 9673 patients with bee sting injuries, 537 had an SSR and 38 died. The most frequent injury sites included the hands and head/face. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the occurrence of SSRs was associated with male sex [odds ratio (95% confidence interval); 1.634 (1.133–2.357)] and age [1.030 (1.020–1.041)]. Additionally, the risk of SSRs from trunk and head/ face stings was high [2.858 (1.405–5.815) and 2.123 (1.333–3.382), respectively]. Bee venom acupuncture [3.685 (1.408–9.641)] and stings in the winter [4.573 (1.420–14.723)] were factors that increased the risk of SSRs. Conclusion Our findings emphasize the need for implementing safety policies and education on bee sting-related incidents to protect high-risk groups.

Considerable evidence has been published since the 2020 Korean Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Guidelines were reported. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) also publishes the Consensus on CPR and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with Treatment Recommendations (CoSTR) summary annually. This review provides expert opinions by reviewing the recent evidence on CPR and ILCOR treatment recommendations. The authors reviewed the CoSTR summary published by ILCOR in 2021 and 2022. PICO (population, intervention, comparator, outcome) questions for each topic were reviewed using a systemic or scoping review methodology. Two experts were appointed for each question and reviewed the topic independently. Topics suggested by the reviewers for revision or additional description of the guidelines were discussed at a consensus conference. Forty-three questions were reviewed, including 15 on basic life support, seven on advanced life support, two on pediatric life support, 11 on neonatal life support, six on education and teams, one on first aid, and one related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Finally, the current Korean CPR Guideline was maintained for 28 questions, and expert opinions were suggested for 15 questions.

Background: There is a need to update the cardiovascular (CV) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score to reflect the current practice in sepsis. We previously proposed the modified CV SOFA score from data on blood pressure, norepinephrine equivalent dose, and lactate as gathered from emergency departments. In this study, we externally validated the modified CV SOFA score in multicenter intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted on ICU patients at six hospitals in Korea. We included adult patients with sepsis who were admitted to ICUs. We compared the prognostic performance of the modified CV/total SOFA score and the original CV/total SOFA score in predicting 28-day mortality. Discrimination and calibration were evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and the calibration curve, respectively. Results: We analyzed 1,015 ICU patients with sepsis. In overall patients, the 28-day mortality rate was 31.2%. The predictive validity of the modified CV SOFA (AUROC, 0.712; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.677–0.746; P < 0.001) was significantly higher than that of the original CV SOFA (AUROC, 0.644; 95% CI, 0.611–0.677). The predictive validity of modified total SOFA score for 28-day mortality was significantly higher than that of the original total SOFA (AUROC, 0.747 vs. 0.730; 95% CI, 0.715–0.779; P = 0.002). The calibration curve of the original CV SOFA for 28-day mortality showed poor calibration. In contrast, the calibration curve of the modified CV SOFA for 28-day mortality showed good calibration. Conclusion In patients with sepsis in the ICU, the modified SOFA score performed better than the original SOFA score in predicting 28-day mortality.