Purpose: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive practical guide for enteral nutrition (EN) designed to enhance patient safety and reduce complications in Korea. Under the leadership of the Korean Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (KSPEN), the initiative sought to standardize EN procedures, improve decision-making, and promote effective multidisciplinary communication. Methods: The KSPEN EN committee identified key questions related to EN practices and organized them into seven sections such as prescribing, delivery route selection, formula preparation, administration, and quality management. Twenty-one experts, selected based on their expertise, conducted a thorough literature review to formulate evidence-based recommendations. Drafts underwent peer review both within and across disciplines, with final revisions completed by the KSPEN Guideline Committee. The guide, which will be published in three installments, addresses critical elements of EN therapy and safety protocols. Results: The practical guide recommends that EN orders include detailed elements and advocates the use of electronic medical records for communication. Standardized prescription forms and supplementary safety measures are outlined. Review frequency is adjusted according to patient condition—daily for critically ill or unstable patients and as dictated by institutional protocols for stable patients. Evidence indicates that adherence to these protocols reduces mortality, complications, and prescription errors. Conclusion The KSPEN practical guide offers a robust framework for the safe delivery of EN tailored to Korea’s healthcare context. It emphasizes standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve nutritional outcomes, patient safety, and operational efficiency. Rigorous implementation and monitoring of adherence are critical for its success.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive practical guide for enteral nutrition (EN) designed to enhance patient safety and reduce complications in Korea. Under the leadership of the Korean Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (KSPEN), the initiative sought to standardize EN procedures, improve decision-making, and promote effective multidisciplinary communication. Methods: The KSPEN EN committee identified key questions related to EN practices and organized them into seven sections such as prescribing, delivery route selection, formula preparation, administration, and quality management. Twenty-one experts, selected based on their expertise, conducted a thorough literature review to formulate evidence-based recommendations. Drafts underwent peer review both within and across disciplines, with final revisions completed by the KSPEN Guideline Committee. The guide, which will be published in three installments, addresses critical elements of EN therapy and safety protocols. Results: The practical guide recommends that EN orders include detailed elements and advocates the use of electronic medical records for communication. Standardized prescription forms and supplementary safety measures are outlined. Review frequency is adjusted according to patient condition—daily for critically ill or unstable patients and as dictated by institutional protocols for stable patients. Evidence indicates that adherence to these protocols reduces mortality, complications, and prescription errors. Conclusion The KSPEN practical guide offers a robust framework for the safe delivery of EN tailored to Korea’s healthcare context. It emphasizes standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve nutritional outcomes, patient safety, and operational efficiency. Rigorous implementation and monitoring of adherence are critical for its success.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive practical guide for enteral nutrition (EN) designed to enhance patient safety and reduce complications in Korea. Under the leadership of the Korean Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (KSPEN), the initiative sought to standardize EN procedures, improve decision-making, and promote effective multidisciplinary communication. Methods: The KSPEN EN committee identified key questions related to EN practices and organized them into seven sections such as prescribing, delivery route selection, formula preparation, administration, and quality management. Twenty-one experts, selected based on their expertise, conducted a thorough literature review to formulate evidence-based recommendations. Drafts underwent peer review both within and across disciplines, with final revisions completed by the KSPEN Guideline Committee. The guide, which will be published in three installments, addresses critical elements of EN therapy and safety protocols. Results: The practical guide recommends that EN orders include detailed elements and advocates the use of electronic medical records for communication. Standardized prescription forms and supplementary safety measures are outlined. Review frequency is adjusted according to patient condition—daily for critically ill or unstable patients and as dictated by institutional protocols for stable patients. Evidence indicates that adherence to these protocols reduces mortality, complications, and prescription errors. Conclusion The KSPEN practical guide offers a robust framework for the safe delivery of EN tailored to Korea’s healthcare context. It emphasizes standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve nutritional outcomes, patient safety, and operational efficiency. Rigorous implementation and monitoring of adherence are critical for its success.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive practical guide for enteral nutrition (EN) designed to enhance patient safety and reduce complications in Korea. Under the leadership of the Korean Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (KSPEN), the initiative sought to standardize EN procedures, improve decision-making, and promote effective multidisciplinary communication. Methods: The KSPEN EN committee identified key questions related to EN practices and organized them into seven sections such as prescribing, delivery route selection, formula preparation, administration, and quality management. Twenty-one experts, selected based on their expertise, conducted a thorough literature review to formulate evidence-based recommendations. Drafts underwent peer review both within and across disciplines, with final revisions completed by the KSPEN Guideline Committee. The guide, which will be published in three installments, addresses critical elements of EN therapy and safety protocols. Results: The practical guide recommends that EN orders include detailed elements and advocates the use of electronic medical records for communication. Standardized prescription forms and supplementary safety measures are outlined. Review frequency is adjusted according to patient condition—daily for critically ill or unstable patients and as dictated by institutional protocols for stable patients. Evidence indicates that adherence to these protocols reduces mortality, complications, and prescription errors. Conclusion The KSPEN practical guide offers a robust framework for the safe delivery of EN tailored to Korea’s healthcare context. It emphasizes standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve nutritional outcomes, patient safety, and operational efficiency. Rigorous implementation and monitoring of adherence are critical for its success.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a comprehensive practical guide for enteral nutrition (EN) designed to enhance patient safety and reduce complications in Korea. Under the leadership of the Korean Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (KSPEN), the initiative sought to standardize EN procedures, improve decision-making, and promote effective multidisciplinary communication. Methods: The KSPEN EN committee identified key questions related to EN practices and organized them into seven sections such as prescribing, delivery route selection, formula preparation, administration, and quality management. Twenty-one experts, selected based on their expertise, conducted a thorough literature review to formulate evidence-based recommendations. Drafts underwent peer review both within and across disciplines, with final revisions completed by the KSPEN Guideline Committee. The guide, which will be published in three installments, addresses critical elements of EN therapy and safety protocols. Results: The practical guide recommends that EN orders include detailed elements and advocates the use of electronic medical records for communication. Standardized prescription forms and supplementary safety measures are outlined. Review frequency is adjusted according to patient condition—daily for critically ill or unstable patients and as dictated by institutional protocols for stable patients. Evidence indicates that adherence to these protocols reduces mortality, complications, and prescription errors. Conclusion The KSPEN practical guide offers a robust framework for the safe delivery of EN tailored to Korea’s healthcare context. It emphasizes standardized protocols and interdisciplinary collaboration to improve nutritional outcomes, patient safety, and operational efficiency. Rigorous implementation and monitoring of adherence are critical for its success.

Purpose: Patients experience severe physical trauma every year. However, studies on survivors’ experiences after severe injury are limited. Previous studies have mainly focused on time spans of trauma treatment. This study aimed to comprehensively explore survivors’ experiences to improve the current quality of trauma treatment and highlight the importance of patient-centered care. Materials and Methods: Structured, face-to-face interviews with six domains were conducted on survivors aged ≥18 years who were previously hospitalized in an intensive care unit due to traumatic injuries. Self-reported questionnaires were administered for a multidimensional assessment of participants’ conditions. Transcripts of each narrative were analyzed per grounded theory. Results: Fourteen participants were assessed. The median injury severity score was 25.5. The median elapsed time from injury to interview was 17.3 months. The physical and psychiatric difficulties of the participants remained unresolved even after completing rehabilitation. The main theme derived from the narratives were struggle with injury, consequences, and contributing factors, with the following subthemes: 1) suffering from injury and treatment, 2) psychological adaptation to the changed self and life after the accident, 3) significant family support, 4) gratitude to medical staff despite inadequacies in the healthcare system, and 5) legal and economic issues that impede recovery. Conclusion Increased efforts focusing on enabling survivors of severe injury to return to society and improve their quality of life are needed, including the establishment of patient-centered care in the trauma field, extended care for the survivors’ families, multidisciplinary treatment, and the collection of quantitative post-discharge data.

Purpose: Patients experience severe physical trauma every year. However, studies on survivors’ experiences after severe injury are limited. Previous studies have mainly focused on time spans of trauma treatment. This study aimed to comprehensively explore survivors’ experiences to improve the current quality of trauma treatment and highlight the importance of patient-centered care. Materials and Methods: Structured, face-to-face interviews with six domains were conducted on survivors aged ≥18 years who were previously hospitalized in an intensive care unit due to traumatic injuries. Self-reported questionnaires were administered for a multidimensional assessment of participants’ conditions. Transcripts of each narrative were analyzed per grounded theory. Results: Fourteen participants were assessed. The median injury severity score was 25.5. The median elapsed time from injury to interview was 17.3 months. The physical and psychiatric difficulties of the participants remained unresolved even after completing rehabilitation. The main theme derived from the narratives were struggle with injury, consequences, and contributing factors, with the following subthemes: 1) suffering from injury and treatment, 2) psychological adaptation to the changed self and life after the accident, 3) significant family support, 4) gratitude to medical staff despite inadequacies in the healthcare system, and 5) legal and economic issues that impede recovery. Conclusion Increased efforts focusing on enabling survivors of severe injury to return to society and improve their quality of life are needed, including the establishment of patient-centered care in the trauma field, extended care for the survivors’ families, multidisciplinary treatment, and the collection of quantitative post-discharge data.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the associations between several obesity-related anthropometric indices and mortality in middle-aged and elderly populations to compare the indices’ predictive ability with that of the body mass index (BMI). METHODS: We analyzed data on 12 indices calculated from 19,805 community-based cohort participants (average age, 63.27 years; median follow-up, 13.49 years). Each index was calculated using directly measured values of height, weight, waist circumference (WC), and hip circumference (HC). We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each index using Cox regression and evaluated mortality prediction with the Harrell concordance index (c-index). RESULTS: Adding anthropometric indices to the basic mortality model (c-index, 0.7723; 95% CI, 0.7647 to 0.7799) significantly increased the predictive power of BMI (c-index, 0.7735; 95% CI, 0.7659 to 0.7811), a body shape index (ABSI; c-index, 0.7735; 95% CI, 0.7659 to 0.7810), weight-adjusted waist index (WWI; c-index, 0.7731; 95% CI, 0.7656 to 0.7807), and waist to hip index (WHI; c-index, 0.7733; 95% CI, 0.7657 to 0.7809). The differences between the BMI model and the other 3 models were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS In predicting all-cause mortality, the ABSI, WWI, and WHI models based on WC or HC had stronger predictive power than conventional risk factors but were not significantly different from the BMI model.

Purpose: To investigate the prevalence of copper, zinc, and vitamin D deficiencies in surgical intensive care unit (SICU) patients and the associations between those deficiencies and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of 210 patients admitted to the SICU of Asan Medical Center between June 2020 and June 2022. Micronutrient levels were measured within 7 days of SICU admission. Primary outcomes were the mortality rate, length of SICU stay, hospital stay duration, and mechanical ventilation duration. Results: Copper deficiency was found in 35% (68/193), zinc deficiency in 52% (100/193), and severe vitamin D deficiency in 46% (82/179) of patients. Copper-deficient patients showed a significantly higher mortality rate (25.0% vs. 12.8%, P=0.044), longer hospital stays (57.8±47.0 vs. 45.2±36.6 days, P=0.041), and extended mechanical ventilation duration (26.9±23.3 vs. 18.8±15.7 days, P=0.012). Zinc deficiency was associated with higher C-reactive protein levels (16.2±9.5 vs. 11.5±8.8 mg/dL, P=0.001) and lower prealbumin levels (6.5±2.8 vs. 9.9±5.6 mg/dL, P<0.001). Severe vitamin D deficiency (<10 ng/mL) was not significantly associated with mortality or other clinical outcomes (mortality:<10 ng/mL vs. ≥10 ng/mL, 13% vs. 18%, P=0.583). Conclusion Micronutrient deficiencies are prevalent in SICU patients. Copper deficiency significantly correlated with poor clinical outcomes, and zinc deficiency showed a strong association with inflammatory markers. Early assessment and supplementation of micronutrients could be beneficial for critically ill surgical patients.

Purpose: There is a high possibility of trauma patients being referred to an unsuitable medical institution for their rehabilitation treatment since the decision is made by them. This study sought to develop a standardized scale to evaluate the need for specialized rehabilitation in patients with multiple traumas and evaluate the effectiveness of the developed scale. Methods: This study employed a systematic review of existing literature to inform the development of a specialized rehabilitation evaluation scale. An expert panel consisting of trauma surgeons, orthopedic surgeons, and rehabilitation medicine physicians collaborated to create a discharge-planning checklist by assessing the need for specialized rehabilitation. The checklist was validated using retrospective data from trauma patients treated at Seoul National University Hospital. Results: We identified 12 studies, providing factors influencing the discharge location and rehabilitation needs of trauma patients. The checklist was developed through expert consensus and comprised 3 criteria: discharge feasibility to specialized rehabilitation facilities, diagnostic eligibility for specialized rehabilitation, and functional assessment. Validation of the checklist demonstrated that the percentage agreement, likelihood ratio of a positive test, and Cohen’s kappa value were 82.1%, 5.21, and 0.375, respectively when comparing whether the checklist was met and the actual discharge location, indicating its effectiveness. Conclusion This study established standardized criteria for assessing the need for specialized rehabilitation in trauma patients, offering a practical tool for clinical use. Implementation of this assessment scale has the potential to improve the trajectory of trauma survivors by facilitating access to appropriate rehabilitation services.