Objective: We evaluated the occupational exposure levels of healthcare workers while conducting rotational pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (RIPAC) using cisplatin in a large animal model. Methods: We performed RIPAC using cisplatin in 6 female pigs and collected surface and air samples during the procedure. Surface samples were obtained from RIPAC devices and personal protective equipment (PPE) by wiping, and air samples were collected around the operating table.All samples were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry to detect platinum. Results: Among all surface samples (n=44), platinum was detected in 41 samples (93.2%) but not in all air samples (n=16). Among samples collected from RIPAC devices (n=23), minimum and maximum cisplatin levels of 0.08 and 235.09 ng/cm2 were detected, mainly because of direct aerosol exposure in the abdominal cavity. Among samples collected from healthcare workers’ PPE (n=21), 18 samples (85.7%) showed contamination levels below the detection limit, with a maximum of 0.23 ng/cm2 . There was no significant contamination among samples collected from masks, shoes, or gloves. Conclusion During the RIPAC procedures, there is a potential risk of dermal exposure, as platinum, a surrogate material for cisplatin, was detected at low concentration levels in some surface samples. However, the respiratory exposure risk was not identified, as platinum was not detected in the airborne samples in this study.

Objective: We evaluated the occupational exposure levels of healthcare workers while conducting rotational pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (RIPAC) using cisplatin in a large animal model. Methods: We performed RIPAC using cisplatin in 6 female pigs and collected surface and air samples during the procedure. Surface samples were obtained from RIPAC devices and personal protective equipment (PPE) by wiping, and air samples were collected around the operating table.All samples were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry to detect platinum. Results: Among all surface samples (n=44), platinum was detected in 41 samples (93.2%) but not in all air samples (n=16). Among samples collected from RIPAC devices (n=23), minimum and maximum cisplatin levels of 0.08 and 235.09 ng/cm2 were detected, mainly because of direct aerosol exposure in the abdominal cavity. Among samples collected from healthcare workers’ PPE (n=21), 18 samples (85.7%) showed contamination levels below the detection limit, with a maximum of 0.23 ng/cm2 . There was no significant contamination among samples collected from masks, shoes, or gloves. Conclusion During the RIPAC procedures, there is a potential risk of dermal exposure, as platinum, a surrogate material for cisplatin, was detected at low concentration levels in some surface samples. However, the respiratory exposure risk was not identified, as platinum was not detected in the airborne samples in this study.

Objective: We evaluated the occupational exposure levels of healthcare workers while conducting rotational pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (RIPAC) using cisplatin in a large animal model. Methods: We performed RIPAC using cisplatin in 6 female pigs and collected surface and air samples during the procedure. Surface samples were obtained from RIPAC devices and personal protective equipment (PPE) by wiping, and air samples were collected around the operating table.All samples were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry to detect platinum. Results: Among all surface samples (n=44), platinum was detected in 41 samples (93.2%) but not in all air samples (n=16). Among samples collected from RIPAC devices (n=23), minimum and maximum cisplatin levels of 0.08 and 235.09 ng/cm2 were detected, mainly because of direct aerosol exposure in the abdominal cavity. Among samples collected from healthcare workers’ PPE (n=21), 18 samples (85.7%) showed contamination levels below the detection limit, with a maximum of 0.23 ng/cm2 . There was no significant contamination among samples collected from masks, shoes, or gloves. Conclusion During the RIPAC procedures, there is a potential risk of dermal exposure, as platinum, a surrogate material for cisplatin, was detected at low concentration levels in some surface samples. However, the respiratory exposure risk was not identified, as platinum was not detected in the airborne samples in this study.

Objective: Understanding the specific fears associated with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly within different cultural contexts, is crucial for developing effective mental health interventions. This study aims to develop and validate the COVID-19 Infection Fear Scale (CIFS) in a collectivist cultural context such as Korea. Methods: A total of 1,002 adults aged 19 to 70 participated in an online survey in May 2020. The CIFS was developed through a multidisciplinary approach, categorizing public fears into two domains: fear of infection and fear of negative outcomes post-infection. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to validate the factor structure. Reliability and construct validity were assessed through correlations with anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Results: The CIFS demonstrated high internal consistency. EFA and CFA supported a two-factor model. The Rasch analysis confirmed good item fit, with infit and outfit indices within the acceptable range. Differential item functioning analysis indicated minor sex and age biases, addressed without removing items. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Fear of negative consequences post-infection showed a stronger correlation with psychological distress than fear of infection. Conclusion The CIFS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring fear related to COVID-19 infection and its consequences, particularly within a collectivist cultural context. This scale can aid in identifying individuals at higher risk of psychological distress and inform targeted interventions.

Objective: Understanding the specific fears associated with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly within different cultural contexts, is crucial for developing effective mental health interventions. This study aims to develop and validate the COVID-19 Infection Fear Scale (CIFS) in a collectivist cultural context such as Korea. Methods: A total of 1,002 adults aged 19 to 70 participated in an online survey in May 2020. The CIFS was developed through a multidisciplinary approach, categorizing public fears into two domains: fear of infection and fear of negative outcomes post-infection. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to validate the factor structure. Reliability and construct validity were assessed through correlations with anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Results: The CIFS demonstrated high internal consistency. EFA and CFA supported a two-factor model. The Rasch analysis confirmed good item fit, with infit and outfit indices within the acceptable range. Differential item functioning analysis indicated minor sex and age biases, addressed without removing items. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Fear of negative consequences post-infection showed a stronger correlation with psychological distress than fear of infection. Conclusion The CIFS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring fear related to COVID-19 infection and its consequences, particularly within a collectivist cultural context. This scale can aid in identifying individuals at higher risk of psychological distress and inform targeted interventions.

Objective: Understanding the specific fears associated with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly within different cultural contexts, is crucial for developing effective mental health interventions. This study aims to develop and validate the COVID-19 Infection Fear Scale (CIFS) in a collectivist cultural context such as Korea. Methods: A total of 1,002 adults aged 19 to 70 participated in an online survey in May 2020. The CIFS was developed through a multidisciplinary approach, categorizing public fears into two domains: fear of infection and fear of negative outcomes post-infection. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to validate the factor structure. Reliability and construct validity were assessed through correlations with anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Results: The CIFS demonstrated high internal consistency. EFA and CFA supported a two-factor model. The Rasch analysis confirmed good item fit, with infit and outfit indices within the acceptable range. Differential item functioning analysis indicated minor sex and age biases, addressed without removing items. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Fear of negative consequences post-infection showed a stronger correlation with psychological distress than fear of infection. Conclusion The CIFS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring fear related to COVID-19 infection and its consequences, particularly within a collectivist cultural context. This scale can aid in identifying individuals at higher risk of psychological distress and inform targeted interventions.

Objective: Understanding the specific fears associated with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly within different cultural contexts, is crucial for developing effective mental health interventions. This study aims to develop and validate the COVID-19 Infection Fear Scale (CIFS) in a collectivist cultural context such as Korea. Methods: A total of 1,002 adults aged 19 to 70 participated in an online survey in May 2020. The CIFS was developed through a multidisciplinary approach, categorizing public fears into two domains: fear of infection and fear of negative outcomes post-infection. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to validate the factor structure. Reliability and construct validity were assessed through correlations with anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Results: The CIFS demonstrated high internal consistency. EFA and CFA supported a two-factor model. The Rasch analysis confirmed good item fit, with infit and outfit indices within the acceptable range. Differential item functioning analysis indicated minor sex and age biases, addressed without removing items. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Fear of negative consequences post-infection showed a stronger correlation with psychological distress than fear of infection. Conclusion The CIFS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring fear related to COVID-19 infection and its consequences, particularly within a collectivist cultural context. This scale can aid in identifying individuals at higher risk of psychological distress and inform targeted interventions.

Objective: Understanding the specific fears associated with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly within different cultural contexts, is crucial for developing effective mental health interventions. This study aims to develop and validate the COVID-19 Infection Fear Scale (CIFS) in a collectivist cultural context such as Korea. Methods: A total of 1,002 adults aged 19 to 70 participated in an online survey in May 2020. The CIFS was developed through a multidisciplinary approach, categorizing public fears into two domains: fear of infection and fear of negative outcomes post-infection. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to validate the factor structure. Reliability and construct validity were assessed through correlations with anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Results: The CIFS demonstrated high internal consistency. EFA and CFA supported a two-factor model. The Rasch analysis confirmed good item fit, with infit and outfit indices within the acceptable range. Differential item functioning analysis indicated minor sex and age biases, addressed without removing items. Construct validity was supported by significant correlations with anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and coping strategies. Fear of negative consequences post-infection showed a stronger correlation with psychological distress than fear of infection. Conclusion The CIFS is a reliable and valid tool for measuring fear related to COVID-19 infection and its consequences, particularly within a collectivist cultural context. This scale can aid in identifying individuals at higher risk of psychological distress and inform targeted interventions.

With increasing demands for medical care by society, the medical system, and general citizens and rapid changes in doctor’s awareness, the competencies required of doctors are also changing. The goal of this study was to develop a doctor’s competency framework from the patient’s perspective, and to make it the basis for the development of milestones and entrustable professional activities for each period of medical student education and resident training. To this end, a big data analysis using topic modeling was performed on domestic and international research papers (2011–2020), domestic newspaper articles (2016–2020), and domestic social networking service data (2016–2020) related to doctor’s competencies. Delphi surveys were conducted twice with 28 medical education experts. In addition, a survey was conducted on doctor’s competencies among 1,000 citizens, 407 nurses, 237 medical students, 361 majors, and 200 specialists. Through the above process, six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 competencies were derived as subject-oriented doctor’s competencies. The core competencies were: (1) competency related to disease and health as an expert; (2) competency related to patients as a communicator; (3) competency related to colleagues as a collaborator; (4) competency related to society as a health care leader (5) competency related to oneself as a professional, and (6) competency related to academics as a scholar who contributes to the development of medicine.

Defining a competent doctor is important for educating and training doctors. However, competency frameworks have rarely been validated during the process of their development in Korea. The purpose of this study was to validate the patient-centered doctor’s competency framework, which had been developed by our expert working group (EWG). Two rounds of Delphi questionnaire surveys were conducted among a panel of experts on medicine and medical education. The panel members were provided with six core competencies, 17 sub-competencies, and 53 enabling competencies, and were asked to rate the importance of these competencies on a 5-point Likert scale. Between April and July 2021, a total of 28 experts completed both rounds. The data of the Delphi study were analyzed for the mean, standard deviation, median, inter-rater agreement (IRA), and content validity ratio (CVR). A CVR >0.36 and IRA ≥0.75 were deemed to indicate validity and agreement. This study found that five enabling competencies were not valid, and agreement was not reached for three sub-competencies and two enabling competencies. In consideration of CVR and the individual opinions of panel members at each session, the final competencies were extracted through consensus meetings of the EWG. The competencies were modified into six core competencies, 16 sub-competencies, and 47 enabling competencies. This study is meaningful in that it proposes patient-centered doctor’s competencies enabling the development of residents’ milestone competencies, an assessment system, and educational programs.