Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

Long coronavirus disease (COVID) is a condition in which coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms persist for over 3 months, and currently poses a global public health challenge. Due to varying manifestations and lack of standardized definitions, diagnostic methods, and treatments, comprehensive clinical guidelines are required. This review article, summarizing research and expert consensus up to June 2023, provides recommendations for diagnosis and long-term management of long COVID symptoms. It emphasizes thorough patient evaluation, including medical history, physical examinations, and tests, and advocates vaccination and antiviral treatments to reduce risk. Guidelines for long COVID will be updated as new knowledge emerges.

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.

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.

"Long COVID" is a term used to describe a condition when the symptoms and signs associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) persist for more than three months among patients infected with COVID-19; this condition has been reported globally and poses a serious public health issue. Long COVID can manifest in various forms, highlighting the need for appropriate evaluation and management by experts from various fields. However, due to the lack of clear clinical definitions, knowledge of pathophysiology, diagnostic methods, and treatment protocols, it is necessary to develop the best standard clinical guidelines based on the scientific evidence reported to date.We developed this clinical guideline for diagnosing and treating long COVID by analyzing the latest research data collected from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic until June 2023, along with the consensus of expert opinions. This guideline provides recommendations for diagnosis and treatment that can be applied in clinical practice, based on a total of 32 key questions related to patients with long COVID. The evaluation of patients with long COVID should be comprehensive, including medical history, physical examination, blood tests, imaging studies, and functional tests. To reduce the risk of developing long COVID, vaccination and antiviral treatment during the acute phase are recommended. This guideline will be revised when there is a reasonable need for updates based on the availability of new knowledge on the diagnosis and treatment of long COVID.

Background: Since the emergence of hypervirulent strains of Clostridioides difficile, the incidence of C. difficile infections (CDI) has increased significantly. Methods: To assess the incidence of CDI in Korea, we conducted a prospective multicentre observational study from October 2020 to October 2021. Additionally, we calculated the incidence of CDI from mass data obtained from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) from 2008 to 2020. Results: In the prospective study with active surveillance, 30,212 patients had diarrhoea and 907 patients were diagnosed with CDI over 1,288,571 patient-days and 193,264 admissions in 18 participating hospitals during 3 months of study period; the CDI per 10,000 patientdays was 7.04 and the CDI per 1,000 admission was 4.69. The incidence of CDI was higher in general hospitals than in tertiary hospitals: 6.38 per 10,000 patient-days (range: 3.25–12.05) and 4.18 per 1,000 admissions (range: 1.92–8.59) in 11 tertiary hospitals, vs. 9.45 per 10,000 patient-days (range: 5.68–13.90) and 6.73 per 1,000 admissions (range: 3.18–15.85) in seven general hospitals. With regard to HIRA data, the incidence of CDI in all hospitals has been increasing over the 13-year-period: from 0.3 to 1.8 per 10,000 patient-days, 0.3 to 1.6 per 1,000 admissions, and 6.9 to 56.9 per 100,000 population, respectively. Conclusion The incidence of CDI in Korea has been gradually increasing, and its recent value is as high as that in the United State and Europe. CDI is underestimated, particularly in general hospitals in Korea.