OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical trait of familial diabetes mellitus (DM) by analyzing participants’ risk of DM according to the age of DM onset in parents and siblings, and to evaluate individuals’ risk of DM-associated cardiometabolic diseases. METHODS: Altogether, 211,173 participants aged ≥40 years from the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study were included in this study. The participants were divided into groups based on the number (1 or 2 relatives) and age of onset (no DM and early, common, or late onset) of familial DM. Participants’ risk of DM was assessed using a Cox regression model with hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A logistic regression model with odds ratios was used to evaluate associations among the participants’ likelihood of acquiring cardiometabolic diseases such as hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: The risk of developing DM was 2.02-fold (95% CI, 1.88 to 2.18) and 2.88-fold (95% CI, 2.50 to 3.33) higher, respectively, in participants with 1 and 2 family members diagnosed with familial DM. It was 2.72-fold (95% CI, 2.03 to 3.66) higher in those with early-onset familial DM. In the early-onset group, the respective risks of hypertension and CKD were 1.87-fold (95% CI, 1.37 to 2.55) and 4.31-fold (95% CI, 2.55 to 7.27) higher than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS The risk of DM and related cardiometabolic diseases was positively associated with the number of family members diagnosed with DM and an early diagnosis in family members with DM.

Background/Aims: This study evaluated the long-term cardiovascular complications among Korean patients with hypertension and compared them with that of controls without hypertension. Methods: The Korean Hypertension Cohort (KHC) enrolled 11,043 patients with hypertension and followed them for more than 10 years. Age- and sex-matched controls without hypertension were enrolled at a 1:10 ratio. We compared the incidence of cardiovascular events and death among patients and controls without hypertension. Results: The mean age was 59 years, and 34.8% and 16.5% of the patients belonged to the high and moderate cardiovascular risk groups, respectively. During the 10-year follow-up, 1,591 cardiovascular events (14.4%) with 588 deaths (5.3%) occurred among patients with hypertension and 7,635 cardiovascular events (6.9%) with 4,826 deaths (4.4%) occurred among controls. Even the low-risk population with hypertension showed a higher cardiovascular event rate than the population without hypertension. Although blood pressure measurements in the clinic showed remarkable inaccuracy compared with those measured in the national health examinations, systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 150 mmHg was significantly associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events. Conclusions This long-term follow-up study confirmed the cardiovascular event rates among Korean hypertensive patients were substantial, reaching 15% in 10 years. SBP levels ≥ 150 mmHg were highly associated with occurrence of cardiovascular event rates.

Background: Topical corticosteroids (TCs) are available both as over-the-counter drugs and prescription medicines at pharmacies.Although they are generally safe drugs, inappropriate and excessive use could result in potential side effects. Thus, it is important to have appropriate knowledge regarding the use of TCs. We performed a cross-sectional survey to assess public knowledge and the potential misuse or overuse of TCs. Methods: A cross-sectional and nationwide online survey was conducted among participants who were aware of TCs. The survey items included sources of information, indications, potential side effects, and methods of application of TCs. A comparative analysis was conducted between those with (TC users) and without (TC non-users) an experience of using TCs. Results: Among 3,000 participants, 74.4% were TC users. The mass media was the most common information source of TCs, and only one-third of the surveyed people relied on pharmacists or doctors for information. Regarding indications and application methods, incorrect answer rate was high in some items, but respondents showed adequate knowledge. However, awareness of the safety of TCs was low. Overall, the TC users showed a higher knowledge of TCs than TC non-users. Conclusions Public knowledge of the use of TCs appears to be appropriate. However, we found potential misuse or overuse of some items and a lack of awareness of the side effects concerning TCs. Thus, healthcare professionals’ significant role is required.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks occur in hospitals in many parts of the world. In hospital settings, the possibility of airborne transmission needs to be investigated thoroughly. Materials and Methods: There was a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 in a hematologic ward in a tertiary hospital, Seoul, Korea. We found 11 patients and guardians with COVID-19 through vigorous contact tracing and closed-circuit television monitoring. We found one patient who probably had acquired COVID-19 through airborne-transmission. We performed airflow investigation with simulation software, whole-genome sequencing of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Results: Of the nine individuals with COVID-19 who had been in the hematologic ward, six stayed in one multi-patient room (Room 36), and other three stayed in different rooms (Room 1, 34, 35). Guardian in room 35 was close contact to cases in room 36, and patient in room 34 used the shared bathroom for teeth brushing 40 minutes after index used.Airflow simulation revealed that air was spread from the bathroom to the adjacent room 1 while patient in room 1 did not used the shared bathroom. Airflow was associated with poor ventilation in shared bathroom due to dysfunctioning air-exhaust, grill on the door of shared bathroom and the unintended negative pressure of adjacent room. Conclusion Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hematologic ward occurred rapidly in the multi-patient room and shared bathroom settings. In addition, there was a case of possible airborne transmission due to unexpected airflow.

Background: and Objective: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) increases the risk of negative health outcomes, including drug-related admissions. Tools for structured medication review have been developed to ensure optimal medication use and safety. Here, we aimed to evaluate medication use review (MUR) tools for community-dwelling older patients. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses Statement (PRISMA). We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 1991 to 2020, excluding tools that are specifically applied to hospitalized patients or nursing home residents. We identified the most common inappropriate medications, drug-disease interactions, drug-drug interactions and prescribing omissions presented among tools. Results: From among 9,788 identified reports screened, 60 met our inclusion criteria; finally, 27 were eligible for data analysis considering originality and up-to-dateness. Most tools presented explicit criteria (93%), and only one was specific to community-dwelling elderly. The most common PIM was tricyclic antidepressants. Use of diltiazem and verapamil in patients with heart failure and the combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory analgesics and warfarin were the most frequent disease-specific PIM and druginteraction, respectively. Conclusions Although several medication review tools have been developed for older adults, specific guidelines for community-dwelling populations remain limited. Furthermore, the list of PIMs differed among available tools. In future, specific but integrating MUR tools need to be developed for clinical practice considering this population.

Objective: We investigated arthralgia and myalgia associated with the use of oral bisphosphonate (BP) by conducting a survey of patient. Methods: The pharmacists conducted a survey between 1 Oct 2019 and 30 Sep 2020 among patients who were dispensed BP in community pharmacies to assess their demographic and medical characteristics, and their experiences with, and process for pain. Logistic regression analyses were performed to find the risk factors associated with the pain, and the odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined. Results: A total of 160 patients who used BP participated in the survey (74 [46.3%] used risedronate; 61 [38.1%] used alendronate; 23 [14.4%] used ibandronate), and 20 (12.5%) of them experienced pain. Significant statistical differences of the characteristics between patients who experienced pain or not were observed regarding menopause, and parity. Compared with women who had one or two parity, women who had more than three parity were associated with the decreased risk of pain (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.04-0.98). Moreover, steady exercise was associated with the decreased risk of pain compared to less exercise (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.14-0.98). Conclusion Our findings suggest that the risk of pain in BP-treated patients might be different regarding the different ingredients of BP, and dosing frequency. This survey highlights a need for a further safety research to understand the factors influencing the pain associated with the BP treatment.

Background/Aims: Despite proper use of pharmaceuticals, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) can lead to problems related to patient safety. We analyzed the characteristics of ADRs, particularly serious adverse events (SAEs), in a single tertiary medical institution. Methods: Spontaneous ADR report data collected from 2010 to 2019 in Seoul National University Hospital were assessed. Causality was evaluated according to the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria. Age, sex, onset, severity, seriousness, and system organ class (SOC) of ADRs and SAEs were analyzed. Results: During the study period, a total of 49,955 individual case safety reports were assessed as possible, probable, or certain. Although the number of gastrointestinal ADR reports was high (25.9%), severe cases were uncommon (2.6%). By contrast, the number of hematologic disorders was low (6.6%) but 39.2% of them were severe. Among ADRs, 10.2% were assessed as SAEs, the proportion of which was high at extreme ages and in males. Body as a whole-general disorders were the most frequently reported SOC for SAEs, followed by skin and appendage disorders. Antineoplastic agents and antibiotics were the most common causative agents of SAEs and ADRs. Anaphylactic reaction was the most frequent SAE (6.5%). Conclusions The proportion of SAE differs according to SOC and drug. Attention should be paid to SAEs in children and older adults because the rate of SAEs is significantly higher at extreme ages.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks occur in hospitals in many parts of the world. In hospital settings, the possibility of airborne transmission needs to be investigated thoroughly. Materials and Methods: There was a nosocomial outbreak of COVID-19 in a hematologic ward in a tertiary hospital, Seoul, Korea. We found 11 patients and guardians with COVID-19 through vigorous contact tracing and closed-circuit television monitoring. We found one patient who probably had acquired COVID-19 through airborne-transmission. We performed airflow investigation with simulation software, whole-genome sequencing of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Results: Of the nine individuals with COVID-19 who had been in the hematologic ward, six stayed in one multi-patient room (Room 36), and other three stayed in different rooms (Room 1, 34, 35). Guardian in room 35 was close contact to cases in room 36, and patient in room 34 used the shared bathroom for teeth brushing 40 minutes after index used.Airflow simulation revealed that air was spread from the bathroom to the adjacent room 1 while patient in room 1 did not used the shared bathroom. Airflow was associated with poor ventilation in shared bathroom due to dysfunctioning air-exhaust, grill on the door of shared bathroom and the unintended negative pressure of adjacent room. Conclusion Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hematologic ward occurred rapidly in the multi-patient room and shared bathroom settings. In addition, there was a case of possible airborne transmission due to unexpected airflow.

Background: Topical steroids are the most commonly prescribed anti-inflammatory agents in dermatology, and patients often experience various adverse events of topical steroid application. Patients’ awareness of adverse effects and understanding of coping strategies for these unwanted events are pivotal elements for the safe use of topical steroids. Objective: This study aimed to assess the prescribing pattern of topical steroids and patient education for safe use by dermatologists and non-dermatology specialists in Korea. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to dermatologists, pediatricians, and other specialists through an online survey.A total of 444 answers were analyzed; then, the numbers were adjusted according to the nationwide proportion of specialists prescribing topical steroids. The total number of respondents was set to 720 after the adjustment. Results: Dermatologists prescribed topical steroids to 49% of their patients, while other specialist doctors prescribed to 6.4% of the patients. Mid-potency steroids were most commonly prescribed (52.9%), followed by low/weak potency (37.6%), in adjusted analysis. Overall, 12.5% of all respondents and 14.5% of dermatologists reported adverse events due to topical steroids within the last month. The physicians spent 2.1 minutes on average (2.0 minutes for dermatologists) for patient education on proper use of topical steroids. The majority (79.1%) of physicians informed patients of the fact that the prescription contained steroids, while some were reluctant to disclose this information because of the negative perception about steroids in the general population. Conclusion This survey provides thorough information on the current status of prescription, counseling condition, doctors’ perception of patients’ knowledge of adverse events, and proper use of topical steroids.

Background: and Objective: The use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) increases the risk of negative health outcomes, including drug-related admissions. Tools for structured medication review have been developed to ensure optimal medication use and safety. Here, we aimed to evaluate medication use review (MUR) tools for community-dwelling older patients. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses Statement (PRISMA). We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from 1991 to 2020, excluding tools that are specifically applied to hospitalized patients or nursing home residents. We identified the most common inappropriate medications, drug-disease interactions, drug-drug interactions and prescribing omissions presented among tools. Results: From among 9,788 identified reports screened, 60 met our inclusion criteria; finally, 27 were eligible for data analysis considering originality and up-to-dateness. Most tools presented explicit criteria (93%), and only one was specific to community-dwelling elderly. The most common PIM was tricyclic antidepressants. Use of diltiazem and verapamil in patients with heart failure and the combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory analgesics and warfarin were the most frequent disease-specific PIM and druginteraction, respectively. Conclusions Although several medication review tools have been developed for older adults, specific guidelines for community-dwelling populations remain limited. Furthermore, the list of PIMs differed among available tools. In future, specific but integrating MUR tools need to be developed for clinical practice considering this population.