RESUMEN
Hypereosinophilic syndrome is a rare disease characterized by marked peripheral eosinophilia and eosinophilic infiltration of many organs such as heart, lung, central nervous system, liver and spleen. This disease is defined by following criteria. First, sustained blood eosinophilia is greater than 1,500/mm3 longer than 6 months. Second, other apparent etiologies for eosinophilia must be absent, including parasitic infestation and allergic disease. Third, patients must have signs and symptoms of organ involvement. In Korea, some cases that eosinophil infiltrated lung, liver, gastrointestinal tract or skin were reported. In this report, we found a case showing myalgia, fatigue and eosinophilia in periodic health examination, and diagnosed hypereosinophilic syndrome.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Sistema Nervioso Central , Eosinofilia , Eosinófilos , Fatiga , Tracto Gastrointestinal , Corazón , Síndrome Hipereosinofílico , Corea (Geográfico) , Hígado , Pulmón , Mialgia , Servicios Preventivos de Salud , Enfermedades Raras , Piel , BazoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recently, the number of internet users is rapidly increasing and internet medical counseling for medical information is also becoming frequent. The aim of this study was to assess the responses and accuracy of internet medical counseling, and compare the responses according to years and operating groups. METHODS: The subject websites were 79 websites in August, 2000, and 88 in May, 2002, which operated board-type medical counseling. We questioned a simulated case of an acute dermatologic disease. Then we analysed the response rate, the time taken to reply and the accuracy of reponses. RESULTS: The number of websites that answered the question was 38 (48.1%) in 2000, and 73 (83.0%) in 2002. The response rate was significantly higher in 2002 than 2000. Time to reply was significantly shorter in 2002 than 2000. The response rate in hospital or clinic groups was higher than in other groups. The rate to make a correct diagnosis was significantly higher in 2002 than 2000. The rate to mention prognosis and necessity of intensive treatment was significantly higher in 2002 than 2000. CONCLUSION: The response rate was higher 2002 than 2000. Time to reply and the accuracy of answer improved in 2002. The response rate was higher in hospital or clinic group than in other groups.