• The Korean Journal of Food And Nutrition
• /
• v.29 no.6
• /
• pp.835-848
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study was to find efficient and customized tools for delivering the benefit of health functional foods (HFFs). Delivery tools which could influence the impact of advertising were images, explanations of ingredients, diagrams of health benefit, patents, and comments from authority. Six advertisements were developed using these tools: "A": relevant image + explanation of ingredients + scientific diagram of efficacy; "B": relevant image + explanation of ingredients; "C": relevant image; "D": irrelevant image; "E": irrelevant image + explanation of ingredient + patent; "F": irrelevant image + explanation of ingredient + comments from authority. To analyze the consumer perceptions on HFFs and advertisement effects, 300 respondents were requested to answer a questionnaire comprising of the following questions: 5 questions of attitudes (necessity of HFFs, trust in HFFs, gathering information, watching advertisements and trust in advertisement claims) and 6 questions on the 6 developed advertisements (attention, understanding, sufficiency of information, sympathy, trust, and purchase). Scoring was done as per the 5 Likert scale. There was a higher proportion of females and the elderly, as compared to males and youngsters. The overall consumer attitudes were positive. Explanation of ingredients, scientific diagram of health benefit, patents and expert comments were helpful factors in increasing the advertisement evaluation by consumer, but the images were not. Advertisement evaluation of consumer did not differ with gender and age. However, differences were observed between some of the consumer attitudes (necessity of HFFs, trust in HFFs, gathering information and trust in advertisements claim) and advertisement evaluations (attention, understanding, sympathy and purchase). Our results indicate that for consumers utilizing the HFFs, advertisements with concrete tools such as diagrams, patent, and expert comments are more helpful. However, for consumers who do not have interest in HFFs, the scientific information was irrelevant. We believe that to maximize the effect of health information in advertisements, consumers should be segmented, and customized tools for each segment needs to be developed.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.41 no.2
• /
• pp.202-209
• /
• 2008

Background: The introduction of Drug Eluting Stents (DES) decreased the number of patients referred for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The impact of DES on CABG (Step 1) was studied and compared with the 1-year outcome after CABG with DES (Step 2). Material and Method: Surgical results for patients who underwent off-pump CABG (OPCAB) before the introduction of DES(n=298) were compared with those who underwent OPCAB after the introduction of DES (n=288) (Step 1). Postoperative 30-day and 1-year results were also compared between the patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using DES (n=220) and those who underwent OPCAB (n=255) (Step 2). Result: Since the introduction of DES, the ratio of CABG versus PCI decreased. In the CABG group, the number of high risk patients such as elderly patients (age 62 vs. 64, p=0.023), those with chronic renal failure (4% vs. 9%, p=0.021), calcification of the ascending aorta (9% vs. 15%, p=0.043), or frequency of urgent or emergent operations (12% vs. 22%, p=0.002) increased. However, there were no differences in the cardiac death and graft patency rates between the two groups (step 1). During the one-year follow up period, the rate of target vessel revascularization (12.3% vs. 2.4%, p<0.001) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE: death, myocardial infarct, TVR) were higher in the DES than the CABG group (13.6% vs 4.3%) (stage 2). Conclusion: Introduction of DES decreased the number of patients referred for surgery, and increased the comorbidity in patients who underwent CABG. DES increased the rate of target vessel revascularization, and the occurrence of MACE during the 1-year follow-up. However, there was no difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction and cardiac death between the two groups.