The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

Background: The number of general cosmetic practitioners impersonating dermatologists in Korea has increased, leading to serious harm that is significant enough to attract the attention of health authorities, which dermatologists are deeply concerned about. Objective: We conducted a survey targeting dermatologists to gather their opinions on the behavior, problems, and countermeasures of general cosmetic practitioners disguising themselves as dermatologists. Methods: A total of 280 dermatologists completed the survey between January and February 2024. The questions covered demographic characteristics, experiences of cosmetic general practitioners falsely introduced themselves as dermatologists, complications experienced by patients who received treatment after being mistaken for a dermatologist, the seriousness of the problem for cosmetic general practitioners impersonating dermatologists, and the relationship between the shortage of essential medical personnel and the phenomenon of cosmetic general practitioners disguising themselves as dermatologists. Results: Despite cases in which cosmetic general practitioners impersonate dermatologists, most dermatologists have not responded appropriately in many instances. Dermatologists have reported many cases of complications after receiving dermatological treatment from such cosmetic general practitioners. Most dermatologists are concerned about the serious problems of general cosmetic practitioners, disguising themselves as dermatologists and anticipating many adverse effects. Conclusion We believe that we need to pool our wisdom to solve these problems and expect that this study will provide valuable basic data for solving these problems in the dermatology and medical environments of Korea.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.

Background: The number of general cosmetic practitioners impersonating dermatologists in Korea has increased, leading to serious harm that is significant enough to attract the attention of health authorities, which dermatologists are deeply concerned about. Objective: We conducted a survey targeting dermatologists to gather their opinions on the behavior, problems, and countermeasures of general cosmetic practitioners disguising themselves as dermatologists. Methods: A total of 280 dermatologists completed the survey between January and February 2024. The questions covered demographic characteristics, experiences of cosmetic general practitioners falsely introduced themselves as dermatologists, complications experienced by patients who received treatment after being mistaken for a dermatologist, the seriousness of the problem for cosmetic general practitioners impersonating dermatologists, and the relationship between the shortage of essential medical personnel and the phenomenon of cosmetic general practitioners disguising themselves as dermatologists. Results: Despite cases in which cosmetic general practitioners impersonate dermatologists, most dermatologists have not responded appropriately in many instances. Dermatologists have reported many cases of complications after receiving dermatological treatment from such cosmetic general practitioners. Most dermatologists are concerned about the serious problems of general cosmetic practitioners, disguising themselves as dermatologists and anticipating many adverse effects. Conclusion We believe that we need to pool our wisdom to solve these problems and expect that this study will provide valuable basic data for solving these problems in the dermatology and medical environments of Korea.

Purpose: Interest in the quality of life (QoL) of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has recently increased. Although measurement tools have been devised for IBD in general, there is no specific tool for measuring the QoL of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Therefore, we developed a QoL questionnaire specifically for patients with UC. Materials and Methods: The Korean Ulcerative Colitis-Specific Questionnaire (K-UCSQ) was developed through item generation, raw-scale construction, focus group meetings, and multi-center field tests. Two hundred patients with UC were recruited for a field test of the K-UCSQ, and subsequent responses to the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) were also obtained. After performing factor analyses to ensure construct validity, the K-UCSQ was finalized as a four-domain, 28-item questionnaire. Subsequent analyses evaluated the reliability of the K-UCSQ in terms of Cronbach’s alpha, concurrent validity in comparison with the pre-established IBDQ, and predictive validity of the area under the ROC curve (AUC) for clinically relevant QoL outcomes. Results: A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.94 showed excellent reliability. Furthermore, correlation analyses demonstrated the concurrent validity of the K-UCSQ in comparison with the IBDQ. The K-UCSQ also showed high validity in predicting the perceived overall health (AUC of 0.812 vs. 0.797 using the IBDQ) and past 2-week QoL (AUC of 0.864 vs. 0.859 using the IBDQ). Conclusion The newly developed K-UCSQ is concise, bathroom problem-emphasizing, and UC-specific, suggesting that it could be a valid and reliable UC-specific instrument for QoL measurement.