Skip to main content
Public Health Weekly Report logoLink to Public Health Weekly Report
. 2026 Feb 27;19(14):601–624. doi: 10.56786/PHWR.2026.19.14.2

Regional Variations in Characteristics and Statistics of Heat-related Illnesses in the Chungcheong Region (2025)

Hoyeong Ahn 1, Haejun Pyun 1, Joo-Yeon Hwang 1, Yeon Hwa Choi 1,*
PMCID: PMC13228902  PMID: 42238513

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to elucidate climate–health vulnerability in the Chungcheong region (i.e., Daejeon, Sejong, Chungcheongbuk-do, and Chungcheongnam-do) and examine in-depth analytical statistics and evidence for establishing climate–health policies and risk communication strategies at the national and regional levels.

Methods

Data derived from the Heat Injury Surveillance System by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency in 2025 were used to monitor incidents of heat injuries and heat-related illnesses in the Chungcheong region (36 municipalities). Additional analyses were conducted using meteorological and healthcare utilization data from the Korea Meteorological Administration and Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, respectively. Regional incidence rates were calculated as the number of heat-related illness cases per 100,000 population. To visualize regional distribution, a hexagon binning (hexbin) tool was applied.

Results

In 2025, a total of 527 heat-related illness cases were reported in the Chungcheong region. Men accounted for 426 cases (80.8%), which is approximately four times higher than women (101 cases, 19.2%). The highest proportion of cases was observed for individuals aged 40–59 years (171 cases, 32.4%). The proportion of cases for individuals aged 60 years and older was 39.6%, representing a decrease of 2.2 percentage points compared with the previous year. The study noted substantial regional disparities in heat-related illness cases, ranging from 2.3 per 100,000 population in Dong-gu, Daejeon, to 49.6 per 100,000 population in Okcheon County, Chungcheongbuk-do, which corresponds to a 21.6-fold difference. In Chungcheongnam-do, the areas exhibiting the most number of cases remained consistent with those observed in the previous year, including Cheongyang County (40.9), Yesan County (25.4), and Dangjin City (23.8). In Chungcheongbuk-do, the ranking of high-incidence areas was reversed compared with the previous year, with Okcheon County (49.6), Danyang County (40.6), and Boeun County (36.2) obtaining the highest rates. Estimated heat-related deaths occurred exclusively in Chungcheongnam-do, with two deaths reported in Dangjin and one each in Cheongyang, Buyeo, and Gongju.

Conclusions

To enhance climate–health literacy and community engagement, furthering stratifying vulnerable groups at risk of heat-related illnesses and developing customized health guidance materials are essential measures. In addition, community-based and ferderalized-/resident-based education and risk communication strategies grounded in regional statistical data are required to promote active participation and awareness at the local level.

Keywords: Climate change, Heat wave, Regional statistics, Chronic disease, Health policy


Key messages

① What is known previously?

Although the incidence of heat-related illnesses has increased steadily in the past five years, in-depth regional analyses that consider geographic and sociodemographic characteristics remain limited.

② What new information is presented?

In 2025, the peak period of heat-related illnesses and estimated deaths shifted earlier—from August to July, indicating an earlier heat risk. Approximately 45% of patients presented with underlying conditions, primarily cardiovascular diseases and diabetes, with increased comorbidity rates throughout the surveillance period. Regional disparities in heat-related and chronic disease patterns were identified across the Chungcheong region.

③ What are implications?

This study provides regional climate–health statistics for identifying climate–heat vulnerability to provide support for vulnerable populations, disparity analyses, targeted prevention strategies, and awareness efforts.

Introduction

Heatwaves are a major health risk factor attributable to climate change, and the magnitude and patterns of health impacts vary according to regional and sociodemographic characteristics [1]. In recent years, both the frequency and intensity of extreme climate events have increased [2], and heatwaves have shown characteristics of earlier onset and prolonged duration. On the Korean Peninsula, unlike the previous year when the period of intense heat began in late July, an early heatwave began in late June and persisted until late August in 2025 [3]. In response, several countries have implemented and operated heat-related illness surveillance systems and heatwave response monitoring based on community resources [4-7].

The UK Health Security Agency operates the national Emergency Department Syndromic Surveillance System, which monitors various syndromes, including heat-related illnesses as well as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. In collaboration with the Met Office, heatwave levels are classified into stages, and early warnings of health risks caused by heatwaves are issued [4].

In the United States, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operate the Heat and Health Initiative. Through this initiative, they provide information to both the public and healthcare professionals by predicting and visualizing heat-related health risk levels for up to seven days. This includes the HeatRisk Forecast Tool, HeatRisk Dashboard, and Clinical Guidance [5].

In 2021, Japan introduced a nationwide heat stroke alert system, under which specific measures, such as refraining from outdoor activities and canceling sporting events, are implemented when the Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature reaches or exceeds 33℃ or 35℃. In addition, the Fire and Disaster Management Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications of Japan collects and provides daily and weekly data on the number of heat-related illness transports by emergency services nationwide through the “Heatstroke Surveillance” system from May to September each year [6]. Based on these data, regional risk levels are rapidly identified and used as a basis for preventive measures by local governments and for issuing public alerts [7].

The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) operates the Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System during the summer, providing timely information on heat-related illness cases nationwide to raise awareness and promote preventive actions aimed at minimizing health impacts from heatwaves. However, regional disparities exist due to differences in heat exposure environments, healthcare accessibility, and response capacity. Therefore, community-based analyses are needed to strengthen regional preparedness for heatwaves and enhancing adaptive capacity to climate change.

Community-based analyses related to heat-related illness have been conducted at the small-area or national level through analyses of patient incidence data [8,9]. However, comparative analyses of regional disparities at the broader regional level remain relatively insufficient. The Chungcheong region has a higher proportion of older adults than the national average [10,11], and Daejeon, Sejong, Chungcheongnam-do, and Chungcheongbuk-do differ substantially in sociodemographic characteristics and include a mix of urban and rural areas, resulting in considerable geographic heterogeneity. Accordingly, in-depth analyses that take these characteristics into account are necessary.

This study aimed to analyze climate vulnerability and identify health disparities in the Chungcheong region using data from the KDCA Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System. Through an in-depth analysis of heat-related illness incidence at the regional level (four metropolitan/provincial units and 36 municipalities), this study sought to identify vulnerable areas and at-risk populations, develop prioritized and tailored prevention and communication strategies, and provide baseline data to enhance regional health equity.

Methods

This study utilized data from the KDCA Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System conducted in 2025. The system operates annually from May to September with the voluntary participation of approximately 500 medical institutions nationwide, reporting cases of heat-related illness among patients visiting emergency departments. The reported data are collected and aggregated following approval by the relevant public health centers and metropolitan/provincial governments, and daily updates on heat-related illness incidence are provided through the KDCA website. In 2025, in alignment with the operating period of the government-wide comprehensive heatwave response plan, the surveillance period began on May 15, five days earlier than the previous surveillance period (May 20 to September 30), and was terminated early on September 25. For the calculation of regional statistics and in-depth analysis of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region, in addition to the reported data on heat-related illness occurrence, the scope of information was expanded to include regional-level data (four metropolitan/provincial units and 36 municipalities) on comorbidity status, trends in occurrence, and treatment outcomes. In addition, database data—including disease statistics from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service and distribution of heat-related illness occurrence according to daily maximum temperature (℃)—were linked and utilized for analysis. For the analysis of the regional occurrence of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region, the number of heat-related illness cases by region was divided by the population of the corresponding region (based on resident registration population statistics from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety as of June 2025) to calculate the number of cases per 100,000 population. To facilitate intuitive identification of the distribution of occurrence, hexagon-binning visualization analysis was applied. Information on comorbidities was collected in accordance with the reporting form of the Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System. The reporting form categorizes comorbidities into diabetes, cerebrovascular diseases (cerebral hemorrhage, cerebral infarction), cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, heart failure, myocardial infarction, angina, arrhythmia, etc.), endocrine disorders (hyperthyroidism, hypothyroidism, hyperadrenocorticism, adrenal insufficiency, etc.), cancer, dementia, others, none, and unknown, with multiple responses allowed. In this study, “none” was reclassified as absence of comorbidity, and all other items were reclassified as presence of comorbidity. The types of comorbidities included diabetes, cerebrovascular diseases, cardiovascular diseases, endocrine disorders, dementia, and cancer, with additional inclusion of mental disorders and respiratory diseases recorded under “others.” Treatment outcomes were classified as discharge, hospitalization (general ward, intensive care unit), transfer, discharge against medical advice, and death. Among these, discharge refers to cases in which patients returned home after amelioration of symptoms following treatment at the emergency department.

Results

1. Distribution of Heat-related Illness Occurrence according to Region in the Chungcheong Region

The occurrence of heat-related illness was higher in Chungcheongnam-do and Chungcheongbuk-do than in Daejeon and Sejong (Figure 1). In both Chungcheongbuk-do and Chungcheongnam-do, the occurrence of heat-related illness began to increase at 33℃ range and increased sharply at 34℃ range. However, in the ≥33℃ range, the patterns of heat-related illness occurrence differed between Chungcheongbuk-do and Chungcheongnam-do: in Chungcheongbuk-do, 76 cases occurred in the 34℃ range, whereas in Chungcheongnam-do, the highest number of cases (73) occurred in the 35℃ range. In 2024, the highest number of cases occurred in the 33℃ range in Chungcheongbuk-do (85 cases) and in the 34℃ range in Chungcheongnam-do (85 cases), indicating that the distribution of heat-related illness occurrence according to daily maximum temperature (℃) increased compared with the previous year (Supplementary Figure 1A; available online).

Figure 1. Regional incidence of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region (2025).

Figure 1

Unit: ℃, no. of cases

2. Regional Statistics on Heat-related Illness Occurrence in the Chungcheong Region

In 2025, a total of 527 heat-related illness cases were reported in the Chungcheong region, with males accounting for 426 cases (80.8%), approximately four times higher than females (101 cases, 19.2%; Table 1) [12]. By age group, individuals aged 40–59 years accounted for the largest proportion (171 cases, 32.4%), whereas the proportion of cases aged ≥60 years was 39.6%, representing a decrease of approximately 2.2% compared with the previous year. By region, Chungcheongnam-do (227 cases) and Chungcheongbuk-do (215 cases) together accounted for approximately 84% of total cases. By type of heat-related illness, heat exhaustion was the most common (358 cases, 67.9%), followed by heat cramps (69 cases, 13.1%) and heat stroke (68 cases, 12.9%). Regarding treatment outcomes, 405 patients (76.9%) were discharged, 89 (16.9%) were hospitalized in general wards, 21 (4.0%) were admitted to intensive care units, 5 (0.9%) died, and 7 (1.3%) were transferred.

Table 1. Regional characteristics of heat-related illness cases in the Chungcheong region.

Classification 2024 (n=538) 2025 (n=527) Increase/decrease (2025–2024)
Sex
Male 418 (77.7) 426 (80.8)
Female 120 (22.3) 101 (19.2)
Age group (yr)
<20 14 (2.6) 26 (4.9) 2.3
20–39 120 (22.3) 121 (22.9) 0.6
40–59 179 (33.3) 171 (32.4) △0.9
60–79 160 (29.7) 147 (27.9) △1.8
≥80 65 (12.1) 62 (11.7) △0.4
Region of occurrence
Daejeon 69 (12.8) 52 (9.9) △2.9
Sejong 29 (5.4) 33 (6.3) 0.9
Chungbuk 196 (36.4) 215 (43.1) 6.7
Chungnam 244 (45.4) 227 (40.8) △4.6
Type of heat-related illnessa)
Heat stroke 109 (20.3) 68 (12.9) △7.4
Heat exhaustion 303 (56.3) 358 (67.9) 11.6
Heat cramps 71 (13.2) 69 (13.1) △0.1
Heat syncope 47 (8.7) 26 (4.9) △3.8
Other 8 (1.5) 6 (1.1) △0.4
Clinical outcome
Discharged 414 (77.0) 405 (76.9) △0.1
Hospital admission 79 (14.7) 89 (16.9) 2.2
Admission to intensive care unit 28 (5.2) 21 (4.0) △1.2
Death 6 (1.1) 5 (0.9) △0.2
Transfer 11 (2.0) 7 (1.3) △0.7
Comorbidity
No 250 (46.5) 291 (55.2) 8.7
Yesb) 288 (53.5) 236 (44.8) △8.7
Cardiovascular disease 150 (27.9) 153 (29.0) 1.1
Diabetes mellitus 80 (14.9) 73 (13.9) △1.0
Cerebrovascular disease 23 (4.3) 11 (2.1) △2.2
Neurological disease 4 (0.7) 8 (1.5) 0.8
Renal disease 16 (3.0) 22 (4.2) 1.2
Cancer 10 (1.9) 25 (4.7) 2.8
Mental disorder 3 (0.6) 5 (0.9) 0.3
Respiratory disease 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 0.0
Month of occurrence
May 3 (0.6) 6 (1.1) 0.5
June 59 (11.0) 51 (9.7) △1.3
July 93 (17.3) 300 (56.9) 39.6
August 325 (60.4) 157 (29.8) △30.6
September 58 (10.8) 13 (2.5) △8.3
Place of occurrencec)
Indoors 108 (20.1) 103 (19.5) △0.6
Outdoors 430 (79.9) 424 (80.5) 0.6
Day of week
Weekday 380 (70.6) 368 (69.8) △0.8
Weekend 158 (29.4) 159 (30.2) 0.8

Unit: no. of cases (%), percentage point change. △=decrease. a)Types of heat-related illnesses (based on the Heat Injury Surveillance System reporting form) [16]: heat stroke: core temperature ≥40℃ with neurological impairment; heat exhaustion: core temperature of 38–40℃ without altered mental status, accompanied by dehydration and generalized weakness; heat syncope: transient loss of consciousness due to peripheral vasodilation and orthostatic hypotension; heat cramps: painful muscle spasms due to electrolyte imbalance from excessive sweating; others: heat edema, other effects of heat and light, and unspecified effects of heat and light. b)As multiple comorbidities could be reported per individual, percentages may not reach a total 100% or exceed 100%. c)Indoor locations include buildings, greenhouses, indoor workplaces, and other indoor spaces; outdoor locations include construction sites, roads, farmland, forests, and outdoor workplaces (including transportation facilities), residential areas, and other outdoor spaces.

A total of 44.8% of patients had one or more underlying conditions, and the major types of underlying diseases were cardiovascular diseases (29.0%) and diabetes (13.9%). The occurrence of heat-related illness was concentrated in July (300 cases, 56.9%) and August (157 cases, 29.8%), indicating that the timing of occurrence was advanced by approximately one month compared with 2024, when cases were concentrated in August (325 cases, 60.4%). The place of occurrence was predominantly outdoors (80.5%, 424 cases), approximately four times higher than indoors (19.5%, 103 cases). The proportion of cases occurring on weekdays was 69.8% (368 cases), approximately 2.3 times higher than on weekends (159 cases, 30.2%).

3. Heat-related Illness Occurrence by Municipality in the Chungcheong Region

In 2025, disparities in heat-related illness incidence across municipalities ranged from 2.3 per 100,000 population in Dong-gu, Daejeon, to 49.6 per 100,000 population in Okcheon County, Chungcheongbuk-do, representing approximately a 21.6-fold difference (Figure 2). In 2005, in Chungcheongnam-do, the areas with the highest incidence remained the same as the previous year—Cheongyang County (40.9), Yesan County (25.4), and Dangjin City (23.8). In contrast, in Chungcheongbuk-do, the areas with the highest incidence were Okcheon County (49.6), Danyang County (40.6), and Boeun County (36.2), and the ranking of these areas was reversed compared with the previous year (Supplementary Figure 1B; available online). In Daejeon, the incidence in Jung-gu, which had been among the highest in 2024, decreased from 8.5 to 4.4 in 2025, whereas Sejong recorded 8.4, similar to 2024. In 2025, estimated deaths from heat-related illness occurred in Dangjin (2 cases), Cheongyang (1 case), Buyeo (1 case), and Gongju (1 case), all located in Chungcheongnam-do; in 2024, five deaths occurred in Chungcheongnam-do and one in Chungcheongbuk-do.

Figure 2. Heat-related illness incidence rates in the Chungcheong region (2025).

Figure 2

Black numbers: Incidence rate of heat-related illness per 100,000 population. Blue numbers: Proportion of heat-related illness patients with comorbidity (%). Red asterisks: Regions with estimated heat-related deaths (Dangjin-si [2], Cheongyang-gun [1], Gongju-si [1], Buyeo-gun [1]).

4. Heat-related Illness Occurrence by Vulnerable Groups in the Chungcheong Region in 2025

To assess vulnerability to heat-related illness occurrence in the Chungcheong region, vulnerable groups among patients with heat-related illness were classified and schematized. Vulnerable groups were categorized into occupational, social, economic, and physical domains, and further subdivided into 16 subgroups, including workplace workers, outdoor workers, recipients of basic livelihood security, and older adults (Supplementary Figure 2; available online).

Among the total 527 patients with heat-related illness, 292 were classified under the occupational category. Within this category, workplace workers accounted for 226 cases (42.8%); followed by agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers (53 cases, 10.1%); military personnel (8 cases, 1.5%); and mobile workers (4 cases, 0.8%; Table 2). In the economic category, recipients of basic livelihood security and homeless individuals accounted for 17 cases (3.2%). In the physical category, older adults aged ≥60 years accounted for 209 cases (39.7%), and individuals with chronic diseases accounted for 236 cases (44.8%).

Table 2. Status of heat-related illness cases occurring in vulnerable occupational settings in the Chungcheong region (2025).

Classification Vulnerable groups to heat-related illnesses
Occupational groups (n=292) Socioeconomic groups
(n=17)
Physiological groups
(n=446)
Industrial workersb)
(n=226)
Agricultural and fishery workers
(n=53)
Mobile workers
(n=4)
Foreign workers
(n=1)
Military
(n=8)
Public
assistance recipients and peopleexperiencing homelessness
(n=17)
Older adults
(n=209)
People with
disabilities
(n=1)
People with chronic diseases
(n=236)
Age group (yr)
0–9 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
10–19 2 (0.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
20–29 27 (11.9) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 8 (100) 1 (5.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 9 (3.8)
30–39 37 (16.4) 4 (7.5) 1 (25.0) 1 (100) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 12 (5.1)
40–49 51 (22.6) 5 (9.4) 2 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 0 (0.0) 1 (100) 27 (11.4)
50–59 48 (21.2) 8 (15.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 6 (35.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 41 (17.4)
60–69 49 (21.7) 14 (26.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (23.5) 99 (47.4) 0 (0.0) 58 (24.6)
70–79 10 (4.4) 12 (22.6) 1 (25.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 48 (23.0) 0 (0.0) 35 (14.8)
≥80 2 (0.9) 8 (15.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (23.5) 62 (29.7) 0 (0.0) 54 (22.9)
≥65 32 (14.2) 26 (49.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 7 (41.2) 157 (75.1) 0 (0.0) 119 (50.4)
Clinical outcome
Discharged 185 (81.9) 39 (73.6) 3 (75.0) 1 (100) 2 (25.0) 11 (64.7) 148 (70.8) 1 (100) 170 (72.0)
Hospital admission/transfer 35 (15.5) 10 (18.9) 1 (25.0) 0 (0) 3 (37.5) 3 (17.6) 49 (23.4) 0 (0.0) 55 (23.3)
Admission to intensive care units 6 (2.7) 3 (5.7) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (37.5) 2 (11.8) 9 (4.3) 0 (0.0) 8 (3.4)
Death 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 3 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.3)
Type of heat-related illness
Heat stroke 12 (5.3) 9 (17.0) 1 (75.0) 0 (0) 4 (50.0) 11 (64.7) 39 (18.7) 1 (100) 38 (16.1)
Heat exhaustion 154 (68.1) 40 (75.5) 3 (25.0) 1 (100) 4 (50.0) 6 (35.3) 141 (67.5) 0 (0.0) 162 (68.6)
Heat syncope 43 (19.0) 4 (7.5) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 15 (7.2) 0 (0.0) 25 (10.6)
Heat cramps 13 (5.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 11 (5.3) 0 (0.0) 9 (3.8)
Other 4 (1.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.8)
Place of occurrencea)
Indoors 46 (20.4) 12 (22.6) 1 (25.0) 0 (0) 1 (12.5) 0 (0.0) 34 (16.3) 0 (0.0) 46 (19.5)
Outdoors 180 (79.6) 41 (77.4) 3 (75.0) 1 (100) 7 (87.5) 17 (100) 175 (83.7) 1 (100) 190 (80.5)

Unit: no. of cases (%). a)Indoor locations include buildings, greenhouses, indoor workplaces, and other indoor spaces; outdoor locations include construction sites, roads, farmland, forests, and outdoor workplaces (including transportation facilities), residential areas, and other outdoor spaces. b)Vulnerable occupational settings include cases occurring in indoor and outdoor workplaces where heat exposure is expected.

By age group, among workplace workers (226 cases), individuals in their 40s accounted for 22.6%, whereas among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers, those in their 60s accounted for the largest proportion at 49.1%. Among those aged ≥65 years, workplace workers accounted for 14.2%, whereas agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers accounted for 49.1%. In the economic category, occurrence was concentrated among those aged 50–59 and 60–69, whereas in the physical category, occurrence was high among those aged 60–69 and those aged ≥80 years.

When vulnerable groups were classified by treatment outcomes, more than 90% of cases in most groups were either discharged or hospitalized in general wards, and were, thus, classified as mild or moderate cases. Among military personnel, the proportion of intensive care unit admission was 37.5% of the total 8. In the economic category, recipients of basic livelihood security and homeless individuals showed 11.8% intensive care unit admission and 5.9% mortality. Among older adults, 4.3% were admitted to intensive care units and 1.4% died. Among military personnel and recipients of basic livelihood security or homeless individuals, the proportion of intensive care unit admission was relatively higher compared with other groups. However, interpretation of the results is limited due to the small number of cases.

Regarding the types of heat-related illness, heat stroke and heat exhaustion accounted for more than 80% in all groups, except workplace workers. The proportion of heat stroke was 50% (4 cases) among military personnel and 62.5% (10 cases) among recipients of basic livelihood security and homeless individuals.

The place of occurrence was predominantly outdoors, whereas indoor occurrence was relatively low. In particular, all cases (17 cases) among recipients of basic livelihood security and homeless individuals occurred outdoors.

5. Comparison of Heat-related Illness Occurrence by Type in the Chungcheong Region

In 2025, among the types of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region, heat exhaustion accounted for 358 (67.9%), heat cramps for 69 (13.1%), and heat stroke for 68 (12.9%; Table 3). Heat exhaustion showed a higher proportion of occurrence in the Chungcheongbuk-do region (47.8%), whereas heat stroke and heat cramps showed the highest proportions in the Chungcheongnam-do region at 58.8% and 60.9%, respectively. In terms of age distribution, among cases of heat stroke, those aged ≥60 years accounted for 57.4% of the total, showing a higher proportion of occurrence among older adults compared with heat exhaustion (39.4%) and heat cramps (21.4%). Regarding the timing of occurrence, heat exhaustion (56.7%), heat stroke (61.8%), and heat cramps (55.1%) were all concentrated in July, and more than 50% occurred during the daytime between 12:00 and 18:00.

Table 3. Comparison of heat-related illness cases by disease type in the Chungcheong region (2025).

Classification Heat stroke (n=68) Heat exhaustion (n=358) Heat cramps (n=69)
Region of occurrence
Daejeon 4 (5.9) 30 (8.4) 8 (11.6)
Sejong 5 (7.4) 21 (5.9) 5 (7.2)
Chungbuk 19 (27.9) 171 (47.8) 14 (20.3)
Chungnam 40 (58.8) 136 (38.0) 42 (60.9)
Age group (yr)
0–19 2 (2.9) 22 (6.1) 2 (2.9)
20–39 13 (19.1) 88 (24.6) 12 (17.4)
40–59 14 (20.6) 107 (29.9) 40 (58.0)
60–79 24 (35.3) 100 (27.9) 14 (20.3)
≥80 15 (22.1) 41 (11.5) 1 (1.4)
Month of occurrence  
May 2 (2.9) 4 (1.1) 0 (0.0)
June 11 (16.2) 34 (9.5) 4 (5.8)
July 42 (61.8) 203 (56.7) 38 (55.1)
August 11 (16.2) 109 (30.4) 24 (34.8)
September 2 (2.9) 8 (2.2) 3 (4.3)
Time of occurrence  
8:00–10:00 2 (2.9) 34 (9.5) 3 (4.3)
10:00–12:00 9 (13.2) 80 (22.3) 8 (11.6)
12:00–14:00 15 (22.1) 55 (15.4) 13 (18.8)
14:00–16:00 20 (29.4) 64 (17.9) 23 (33.3)
16:00–18:00 13 (19.1) 63 (17.6) 10 (14.5)
After 18:00 9 (13.2) 62 (17.3) 12 (17.4)
Clinical outcome  
Discharged 34 (50.0) 294 (82.1) 52 (75.4)
Hospital admission/transfer 18 (26.5) 58 (16.2) 15 (21.7)
Admission to intensive care unit 11 (16.2) 6 (1.7) 2 (2.9)
Death 5 (7.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
Comorbidity  
No 26 (38.2) 196 (54.7) 44 (63.8)
Yesa) 42 (61.8) 162 (45.3) 25 (36.2)
Cardiovascular disease 19 (27.9) 91 (25.4) 15 (21.7)
Diabetes mellitus 18 (26.5) 46 (12.8) 7 (10.1)
Cerebrovascular disease 1 (1.5) 6 (1.7) 3 (4.3)
Neurological disease 1 (1.5) 7 (2.0) 0 (0.0)
Renal disease 3 (4.4) 15 (4.2) 0 (0.0)
Cancer 7 (10.3) 16 (4.5) 2 (2.9)
Mental disorder 1 (1.5) 4 (1.1) 0 (0.0)
Respiratory disease 1 (0.3) 1 (1.5) 0 (0.0)

Unit: no. of cases (%). a)As multiple comorbidities could be reported per individual, percentages may not reach a total of 100% or may exceed 100%.

In the treatment outcome category, most patients with heat exhaustion (82.1%) were discharged, whereas the proportions were 75.4% for heat cramps and 50.0% for heat stroke. When comparing the proportion of comorbidity, 61.8% of patients with heat stroke had comorbidities, showing a higher proportion than heat exhaustion (45.3%) and heat cramps (36.2%). Regarding the types of comorbidities, cardiovascular diseases were most common, followed by diabetes in heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and heat cramps.

6. Trends in Heat-related Illness and Comorbidities in the Chungcheong Region in 2025

In 2025, the number of heat-related illness cases was highest in July (301), followed by August (157) and September (13) (Figure 3). The proportion of patients with heat-related illness with comorbidities exceeded 30% from May, the initial surveillance period, and continued to increase, reaching 53.8% in September. The proportion of cardiovascular disease comorbidity was 16.7% in May and remained above 20% through September, and the proportion of patients with heat-related illness with diabetes increased to 15.3% in August and 30.8% in September.

Figure 3. Trends in major comorbidities among heat-related illness patients by month in the Chungcheong region (2025).

Figure 3

Unit: no. of cases, %

Discussion

Recognizing the severity of climate change and responding to it requires an understanding of climate and health among various stakeholders, including the public, researchers, and policymakers. Climate health literacy has emerged as an important concept, referring to the ability to understand the health impacts of climate change and to translate this understanding into community-level responses and behavioral actions.

The health impacts of heatwaves vary in terms of health damage and patterns according to regional, geographic, and sociodemographic characteristics [13]. Despite recent worker health measures for populations vulnerable to heatwaves (implemented in June 2025) and the comprehensive summer natural disaster countermeasures (May 2025), previous policy research related to heatwaves has been conducted partially for infants and older adults, and research on diverse vulnerable groups remains insufficient.

Accordingly, this study identified the occurrence of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region (four metropolitan/provincial units and 36 municipalities) and conducted an analysis of regional health disparities. Unlike the existing monitoring results of the Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System (the aggregated number of heat-related illness cases occurring on the previous day), the incidence rate of heat-related illness per 100,000 population was calculated by adjusting for regional population size [14]. Based on these regional statistical results, there are plans to establish and implement community-based participatory and resident-oriented heat-related illness prevention education and communication strategies targeting health-vulnerable areas and vulnerable groups. The Chungcheong region includes metropolitan cities and rural and fishing areas, making it possible to compare disparities according to regional characteristics. Differences in the number of cases by temperature were observed between Chungcheongbuk-do and Chungcheongnam-do. Although the average temperatures of the two regions were similar, differences were identified in the timing and number of days of heatwaves and tropical nights, as well as in the number of precipitation days, precipitation amounts, and heavy rainfall events. Research is needed to analyze psychosociological causes and to assess the current status related to geographic and topographic climatic characteristics and regional disparities.

In the Chungcheong region, occupationally vulnerable groups accounted for approximately 55% of all patients with heat-related illness, and among them, workplace workers accounted for 77.4% of the total occupational group. This is consistent with previous research findings that workers exposed to high-temperature environments for prolonged periods are at risk of heat-related illness [1]. Among agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers, heat-related illness occurrence was higher among older adults aged ≥65 years, whereas the age group with the highest occurrence among workplace workers was middle-aged adults aged 40–49 years. Agricultural, forestry, and fishery workers accounted for the second highest proportion among all occupational groups, reflecting the regional characteristics of the Chungcheong region, where urban and rural areas coexist. Among military personnel, all were in their 20s, and although the number of cases increased by 33% compared with the previous year, the aggregation of case counts was limited. This is consistent with the first academic journal article on military heat-related illness that reported an increase in heat-related illness within military units [15].

In the Chungcheong region, 44.8% of all patients with heat-related illness had comorbidities, and the types of comorbidities were most commonly cardiovascular diseases (29.0%), followed by diabetes (13.9%). The proportion of comorbidity increased continuously from 33.3% in May to 53.8% in September, suggesting the need for continuous heatwave management not only during the intensive heatwave management period of July–August but also from early summer (May–June) through late heat (September) and thereafter. In collaboration with local governments in each region, it is necessary to closely identify local residents with chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease or diabetes, and to establish and implement education and communication plans by city, county, and district.

There are limitations in sufficiently explaining the magnitude of occurrence and the distribution of severity of health impacts resulting from heatwaves based solely on surveillance using a single data source. In this study, analysis of disease subcategory statistics by healthcare institution location from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (2020–2024) showed that, among heat-related illnesses, heat exhaustion and heat stroke had higher proportions in that order, and this was similar to the results of the Heat-Related Illness Emergency Department Surveillance System analysis (Supplementary Table 1; available online) [16]. In this regard, the findings of this study suggest the need for research linking and analyzing multi-layered data for heatwave response.

This analysis is meaningful in that it identified and summarized health vulnerability to heat-related illness through the production of regional climate–health statistics at the level of the Chungcheong region (four metropolitan/provincial units and 36 municipalities). However, it has limitations in explaining the overall magnitude and distribution of health impact occurrence resulting from climate change.

In the future, by expanding data sources to include the National Health Insurance Service, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, and emergency transport data from the National Fire Agency, in-depth research is needed on the protection of climate–health vulnerable groups and analysis of regional disparity factors and causes, and analytical approaches involving the Community Health Survey and acute cardiac arrest occurrence are also needed.

The regional-level occurrence of heat-related illness in the Chungcheong region and interregional health disparities were quantitatively presented, and it is expected that these results will be utilized to develop community-based participatory and resident-oriented educational content and to enhance community participation and awareness through the training of regional health leaders.

Acknowledgments

None.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary data are available online.

phwr-19-14-601-supple.pdf (650.7KB, pdf)

Declarations

Ethics Statement: Not applicable.

Funding Source: None.

Conflict of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization: JYH, YHC. Data curation and Methodology: HYA, HJP. Formal analysis: HYA, HJP. Visualization: HYA, HJP. Writing – original draft: HYA, HJP. Writing – review & editing: JYH, YHC.

References

  • 1.World Health Organization, World Meteorological Organization, author. Climate change and workplace heat stress: technical report and guidance. World Health Organization; 2025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ministry of Environment, National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), author Korean climate crisis assessment report 2025: impacts and adaptation. NIER; 2025. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Korea Meteorological Administration, author. Open MET Data Portal [Internet] Korea Meteorological Administration; 2023. [cited 2023 Jan 2]. Available from: https://data.kma.go.kr/cmmn/main.do . [Google Scholar]
  • 4.UK Health Security Agency, author. Syndromic surveillance: systems and analyses-emergency department syndromic surveillance system (EDSSS) [Internet] GOV.UK; 2018-2026. [cited 2025 Nov 1]. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/syndromic-surveillance-systems-and-analyses . [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), author CDC announces important advances in protecting Americans from heat [Internet] CDC; 2024. [cited 2025 Aug 19]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/p0422-heat-protection.html . [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Fire and Disaster Management Agency, author. Heatstroke information: data on emergency transports due to heatstroke [Internet] [cited 2025 Nov 1]. Available from: https://www.fdma.go.jp/disaster/heatstroke/
  • 7.Ministry of Health, author; Labour and Welfare (Japan), author Workplace heatstroke prevention information [Internet] Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare; 2025. [cited 2025 Aug 19]. Available from: https://neccyusho.mhlw.go.jp/ [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kwon HG, Choi MY, Yi C, Park J. Analysis of the causes of heatwave vulnerability on a detailed scale in the summer of 2018: focus on Gurye-gun, Sunchang-gun. J Clim Change Res. 2021;12:661–76. doi: 10.15531/KSCCR.2021.12.6.661. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Yi C, Kwon HG, Bae MK. Research on determination of heat wave damage in Korea and direction for management. J Clim Change Res. 2024;15:141–52. doi: 10.15531/KSCCR.2024.15.2.141. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lee G, Park MB, Kim EA, et al. A study on spatial autocorrelation according to the geographical distribution of major health indicators: focusing on regional units in Chungcheong province. Public Health Wkly Rep. 2024;17:1071–89. doi: 10.56786/PHWR.2024.17.25.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kim E, Kang SH, Choi YH. Health behavior and chronic disease management status in the Chungcheong region: the results of 2023 Korea Community Health Survey. Public Health Wkly Rep. 2024;17:2077–84. doi: 10.56786/PHWR.2024.17.48.1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ryu JH, Min MK. Diagnosis and treatment of patients with heat-related illnesses. J Korean Med Assoc. 2021;64:296–302. doi: 10.5124/jkma.2021.64.4.296. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, author. Eighth session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction; 2025 Jun 2-6; Geneva, Switzerland. Geneva: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction; 2025. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kuo WY, Huang CC, Chen CA, et al. Epidemiological characteristics of heat-related illness: a nationwide study in Taiwan. BMC Public Health. 2025;25:3063. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-24344-1.961fa4c3f91a4bb4a59cbbca48b641c6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Jung JH, Lim H, Hwang SI, Yu JA. Analyzing and assessing the current status of heat-related illnesses in the South Korean military. Mil Med. 2024;189:e2499–505. doi: 10.1093/milmed/usae115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service (HIRA), author IRA Open Data Portal: OLAP statistics table (Heat-related disease incidence and medical use statistics) [Internet] HIRA; 2025. [cited 2026 Feb 12]. Available from: https://opendata.hira.or.kr/op/opc/olap4thDsInfoTab5.do?moveFlag=Y#none . [Google Scholar]
Public Health Wkly Rep. 2026 Feb 27;19(14):601–624. [Article in Korean]

2025년 충청권 온열질환 지역통계 현황 및 특성

안 호영 1, 편 혜준 1, 황 주연 1, 최 연화 1,*

Abstract

목적

충청권(대전, 세종, 충북, 충남) 단위의 기후보건 취약성을 파악하여 지역적∙인구사회학적 특성을 고려한 맞춤형 보건정책 수립 및 지역별 예방‧홍보 전략을 마련하기 위한 기초자료를 확보하기 위해 수행되었다.

방법

2025년 시행된 질병관리청 온열질환 응급실감시체계 자료를 활용하여, 충청권의 온열질환∙기저질환 현황 및 발생 추이를 산출하였으며, 기상청, 건강보험심사평가원 등 DB 자료를 연계∙활용하여 분석하였다. 지역발생 현황 분석은 지역별 인구 10만 명당 온열환자 수를 산출하였으며, 발생 분포를 직관적으로 파악하기 위하여 헥사곤 빈(hexagon-bining) 시각화 분석을 적용하였다.

결과

2025년 충청권 온열질환자는 총 527명이었으며, 남성이 426명(80.8%)으로 여성(101명, 19.2%) 대비 약 4배 많았고, 연령별로는 40–59세가 171명(32.4%)으로 가장 많았다. 온열질환은 열탈진, 열경련 및 열사병 순으로 발생하였다. 온열질환자 최다 발생 시기는 7월로, 전년대비 한 달가량 앞당겨졌다. 기저질환 동반율은 약 45%로 심혈관계질환, 당뇨 순이였으며, 감시기간(5–9월) 동안 지속 증가하였다. 온열질환 발생률 지역 간 최대 격차는 대전 동구가 인구 10만 명당 2.3명, 충북 옥천군이 인구 10만 명당 49.6명으로 약 21.6배로 나타났다. 충남 지역 온열질환 발생 상위 지역은 청양군(40.9명), 예산군(25.4명), 당진시(23.8명)로 전년과 동일하였으나, 충북 지역에서는 옥천군(49.6명), 단양군(40.6명), 보은군(36.2명) 순으로 발생률 상위 지역의 순서가 작년 대비 역순으로 나타났다. 온열질환 추정 사망자가 발생한 지역은 당진시 2명, 청양군 1명, 공주시 1명, 부여군 1명으로 모두 충남 지역이었다.

결론

본 연구를 통해 폭염으로 인한 온열질환 발생 시기가 조기화되고 있음을 확인하였다. 이에 폭염으로 인한 건강 피해는 증가할 것으로 예상된다. 특히 온열질환자 중 기저질환 동반 환자는 폭염 집중 관리 기간인 7–8월뿐만 아니라 초여름(5–6월)부터 늦더위(9월)까지 지속적인 예방∙관리가 필요하다. 지역사회 기후보건 리터러시 및 참여율 제고를 위해서 온열질환 민감대상군 유형을 세분화하고 맞춤형 건강수칙 컨텐츠 개발과 지역통계 자료를 바탕으로 지역사회 참여형 및 주민밀착형 교육∙홍보 전략이 필요하다.

Keywords: 기후보건, 온열질환, 지역통계, 만성질환, 보건정책


핵심요약

① 이전에 알려진 내용은?

최근 5년간 폭염으로 인한 온열질환 발생이 지속 증가하고 있으나, 지역적·지리적·인구사회학적 특성을 고려하여 지역 단위 기후보건 취약성 및 건강 격차 분석을 위한 심층연구는 부족한 실정이다.

② 새로이 알게 된 내용은?

2025년 온열질환자 및 추정사망자 발생 집중 시기는 지난해 8월에서 7월로 앞당겨져, 폭염 위험이 조기에 나타났다. 온열질환자 중 약 45%가 기저질환(심혈관계질환, 당뇨병 순)을 동반하였고 감시기간(5–9월) 동안 기저질환 동반율은 지속적으로 증가하였다. 충청권(4개 시‧도 및 36개 시‧군‧구)의 온열질환‧기저(만성)질환 발생 양상 및 지역격차 현황을 확인하였다.

③ 시사점은?

충청권 기후보건 지역통계 산출을 통해 온열질환 건강 취약성을 파악하고 정리하였다는 점에서 그 의의가 있다. 앞으로 기후보건 민감집단 보호, 지역 건강격차 해소를 위하여 격차 요인 및 원인분석 등 심층 연구가 필요하며, 지역통계 결과를 활용한 민감대상별 온열질환 예방·홍보 전략 및 건강취약지역 대상 인식제고가 필요하다.

서 론

폭염은 기후변화에 기인한 건강위험의 주요 요인으로 지역‧인구사회학적 특성 차이에 따라 건강 피해 규모와 양상이 다르게 나타난다[1]. 최근 이상기후 현상의 발생 빈도와 강도가 증가하고 있으며[2], 폭염의 발생시기 조기화와 지속 기간의 장기화 특성을 나타낸다. 한반도는 7월 말부터 본격적인 무더위가 시작되었던 작년과 달리 2025년에는 6월 말부터 이른 무더위가 나타나 8월 하순까지 지속되었다[3]. 이를 위해 해외 주요 국가에서는 지역사회 자원을 기반으로 온열질환 감시체계 운영 및 폭염 대응 모니터링을 실시‧운영하고 있다[4-7].

영국 보건안보청(UK Health Security Agency)은 국가 응급실 감시체계(Emergency Department Syndromic Surveillance System) 운영을 통해 온열질환뿐 아니라 심혈관∙호흡기계 질환 등 다양한 증후군을 모니터링하고 있다. 기상청(Met Office)과 연계 운영을 통해 폭염 수준을 단계별로 구분하여 폭염으로 인한 건강 위험 조기 경보를 시행하고 있다[4].

미국 질병통제예방센터(Centers for Disease Control & Prevention) 및 국립해양대기청(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)은 열과 건강 이니셔티브(Heat and Health Initiative) 운영을 통해 열위험 예측 도구(HeatRisk Forecast Tool), 폭염위험 대시보드(HeatRisk Dashboard), 임상 가이드라인(Clinical Guidance) 등 최대 7일간의 폭염 건강 위험 수준을 예측∙시각화하여 국민과 의료진에게 정보를 제공하고 있다[5].

일본은 2021년 전국 단위의 열사병 경보(Heat Stroke Alert)를 통해 습구흑구온도지수 33℃ 이상과 35℃ 이상일 때 외출 자제, 운동 경기 취소 등 구체적 조치를 시행한다. 또한 일본 총무성 소방청(Fire and Disaster Management Agency)은 매년 5월부터 9월까지 ‘열사병 구조∙이송 감시체계(Heatstroke Surveillance)’ 운영을 통해 전국 구급대에서 발생하는 온열질환 이송 건수를 일∙주 단위로 수집∙제공하고 있다[6]. 이를 기반으로 지역별 위험도를 신속히 파악하고 지방자치단체의 예방조치와 대국민경보의 발령 근거로 활용한다[7].

질병관리청은 여름철 온열질환 응급실 감시체계 운영을 통하여 전국 단위 온열질환자 현황을 신속히 제공함으로써 주의를 환기하고 폭염 관련 건강피해를 최소화하기 위한 예방 활동을 유도하고 있으나, 지역 간 폭염 노출 환경, 의료접근성, 대응자원 수준에 따라 지역 간 격차가 존재하기 때문에 지역별 폭염 대비태세 강화 및 기후변화 적응력 향상을 위한 지역사회 기반 분석이 필요하다.

온열질환 관련 지역사회 기반 분석은 일부 소지역 또는 전국 단위의 환자 발생 정보 분석이 이루어졌으나[8,9], 권역 단위 지역격차 비교분석은 상대적으로 부족하다. 충청권은 고령인구의 비율이 전국 평균보다 높으며[10,11], 대전과 세종, 충남과 충북이 인구사회학적 특성을 비롯하여 도시와 농어촌이 혼재되어 지리적 특성의 차이도 크기 때문에 이를 고려한 심층분석이 필요하다.

본 연구에서는 질병관리청 온열질환 응급실 감시체계 자료를 기반으로 충청권의 기후 취약성을 분석하고 건강 격차를 확인하고자 한다. 지역 단위(4개 시∙도 및 36개 시∙군∙구) 온열질환 발생 현황에 대한 심층 분석을 통해 취약 지역 및 민감대상군을 선별하여 맞춤형 우선순위 예방∙홍보 전략을 마련하고 지역 건강형평성 제고를 위한 기초 자료를 확보하기 위해 분석하였다.

방 법

본 연구는 2025년 시행된 질병관리청 온열질환 응급실 감시체계 자료를 활용하여 분석하였다. 전국 500여 개 의료기관의 자발적 참여로 매년 운영기간(5–9월) 동안 응급실 내원 환자를 대상으로 온열질환 발생정보를 신고하고 있으며, 관할 보건소 및 시∙도 승인을 거쳐 감시정보를 수집∙집계하여 질병관리청 누리집을 통해 온열질환 일일발생 현황을 제공하고 있다. 2025년도는 범부처 폭염 종합대책 운영 기간에 맞추어 기존 감시기간(5.20–9.30)보다 5일이 이른 5월 15일부터 시작하여 9월 25일에 조기 종료하였다. 충청권 온열질환 지역통계 산출 및 심층 분석을 위하여 온열질환 신고현황 정보 외에 동반질환, 진료결과 등 지역 단위(4개 시∙도 및 36개 시∙군∙구) 동반질환 현황 및 발생 추이 정보를 확대하였으며, 질병 통계(건강보험심사평가원), 일 최고기온(℃)에 따른 온열질환 발생 분포 등 DB 자료를 연계∙활용하여 분석하였다. 충청권 온열질환 지역발생 현황 분석은 지역별 온열질환 발생자 수를 해당 지역의 인구수(2025년 6월 행정안전부 주민등록인구 통계 기준)로 나누어 인구 10만 명당 환자 수를 산출하였으며, 발생 분포를 직관적으로 파악하기 위하여 헥사곤 빈(hexagon-bining) 시각화 분석을 적용하였다. 동반질환 정보는 「온열질환 응급실감시체계」 신고서식에 따라 수집되었다. 신고서식은 당뇨병, 뇌혈관질환(뇌출혈, 뇌경색), 심혈관질환(고혈압, 심부전증, 심근경색, 협심증, 부정맥 등), 내분비계질환(갑상선기능항진증∙저하증, 부신피질항진∙저하증 등), 암, 치매, 기타, 해당 없음, 알 수 없음 항목으로 구분되며 복수응답이 가능하였다. 본 연구에서는 ‘해당 없음’을 동반질환 무로, 이를 제외한 모든 항목을 동반질환 유로 재분류하였고 동반질환 종류는 당뇨, 뇌혈관질환, 심혈관질환, 내분비질환, 치매, 암과 함께 기타에 기재된 정신질환, 호흡기질환을 추가로 포함하였다. 진료 결과는 퇴원, 입원(일반병실, 중환자실), 전원, 무단퇴원, 사망으로 분류하여 수집되었으며 진료결과 중 퇴원은 응급실 처치 후 증상 호전으로 귀가한 경우를 의미한다.

결 과

1. 충청권 지역에 따른 온열질환 발생분포 현황

대전, 세종보다 충남, 충북에서 온열질환 발생이 많았다(그림 1). 충북과 충남의 경우 공통적으로 33℃ 구간에서 온열질환 발생이 증가하기 시작하였으며, 34℃ 구간에서 급증하였다. 그러나 33℃ 이상 구간에서는 충북과 충남의 온열질환 발생 양상이 다르게 나타났는데 충북은 34℃ 구간에서 76명 발생하였으며, 충남의 경우 35℃ 구간에서 73명의 최다 환자가 발생하였다. 2024년의 경우 충북은 33℃ 구간에서 85명, 충남은 34℃ 구간에서 85명으로 최다 발생하였으며, 작년 대비 일 최고기온(℃)에 따른 온열질환 발생분포도 상승한 것을 나타냈다(보충 그림 1A; available online).

그림 1. 충청권 지역에 따른 온열질환 발생 분포(2025년).

그림 1

단위: ℃, 명

2. 충청권 온열질환 발생 지역통계 현황

2025년 충청권 온열질환자는 총 527명이었으며, 남성이 426명(80.8%)으로 여성(101명, 19.2%) 대비 약 4배 많았다(표 1) [12]. 연령별로는 40–59세가 171명(32.4%)으로 가장 많았으며, 60세 이상 발생률은 39.6%로 전년 대비 약 2.2%p 감소하였다. 지역별로는 충남(227명)과 충북(215명)이 전체 발생의 약 84%를 차지하였다. 온열질환자는 열탈진이 358명(67.9%)으로 가장 많았으며, 열경련 69명(13.1%), 열사병 68명(12.9%) 순이었다. 진료결과는 퇴원 405명(76.9%), 일반병실 입원 89명(16.9%), 중환자실 입원 21명(4.0%), 사망 5명(0.9%), 전원 7명(1.3%)이었다.

표 1. 충청권 온열질환 발생 지역통계 현황.

구분 2024년(n=538) 2025년(n=527) 전년 대비 증감(2025–2024)
성별
남 418 (77.7) 426 (80.8)
여 120 (22.3) 101 (19.2)
연령
<20 14 (2.6) 26 (4.9) 2.3
20–39 120 (22.3) 121 (22.9) 0.6
40–59 179 (33.3) 171 (32.4) △0.9
60–79 160 (29.7) 147 (27.9) △1.8
≥80 65 (12.1) 62 (11.7) △0.4
발생지역
대전 69 (12.8) 52 (9.9) △2.9
세종 29 (5.4) 33 (6.3) 0.9
충북 196 (36.4) 215 (43.1) 6.7
충남 244 (45.4) 227 (40.8) △4.6
온열질환 종류a)
열사병 109 (20.3) 68 (12.9) △7.4
열탈진 303 (56.3) 358 (67.9) 11.6
열경련 71 (13.2) 69 (13.1) △0.1
열실신 47 (8.7) 26 (4.9) △3.8
기타 8 (1.5) 6 (1.1) △0.4
진료결과
퇴원 414 (77.0) 405 (76.9) △0.1
입원(일반병실/응급실) 79 (14.7) 89 (16.9) 2.2
입원(중환자실) 28 (5.2) 21 (4.0) △1.2
사망 6 (1.1) 5 (0.9) △0.2
전원 11 (2.0) 7 (1.3) △0.7
기저질환
무 250 (46.5) 291 (55.2) 8.7
유b) 288 (53.5) 236 (44.8) △8.7
심혈관계 150 (27.9) 153 (29.0) 1.1
당뇨 80 (14.9) 73 (13.9) △1.0
뇌혈관 23 (4.3) 11 (2.1) △2.2
내분비계 4 (0.7) 8 (1.5) 0.8
치매 16 (3.0) 22 (4.2) 1.2
암 10 (1.9) 25 (4.7) 2.8
정신질환 3 (0.6) 5 (0.9) 0.3
호흡기 2 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 0.0
발생시기
5월 3 (0.6) 6 (1.1) 0.5
6월 59 (11.0) 51 (9.7) △1.3
7월 93 (17.3) 300 (56.9) 39.6
8월 325 (60.4) 157 (29.8) △30.6
9월 58 (10.8) 13 (2.5) △8.3
발생장소c)
실내 108 (20.1) 103 (19.5) △0.6
실외 430 (79.9) 424 (80.5) 0.6
요일
주중 380 (70.6) 368 (69.8) △0.8
주말 158 (29.4) 159 (30.2) 0.8

단위: 명(%), %P. △=감소. a)온열질환의 종류(온열질환 응급실감시체계 신고 서식을 바탕으로 수집) [12]: 열사병-심부체온 40℃ 이상, 신경학적 장애 동반, 열탈진-심부체온 38–40℃, 의식변화 없이 경도의 체온조절 장애, 탈수 및 전신쇠약 증상 동반, 열실신-열발산을 위한 혈관확장으로 일시적으로 뇌혈류 감소, 기립성 저혈압으로 인한 실신, 열경련-과도한 발한으로 인한 전해질 불균형으로 나타나는 근육경련, 기타-열부종, 기타 열 및 빛의 영향, 상세불명의 열 및 빛의 영향. b)기저질환은 중복 가능하여, 비율의 합이 100%가 되지 않거나 100%를 초과할 수 있음. c)발생장소 중 실내는 건물, 비닐하우스, 실내작업장, 기타 실내장소, 실외는 강가·해변, 길가, 논밭, 산, 실외작업장, 운동장(공원), 주거지 주변, 기타 실외장소를 포함.

전체 환자의 44.8%가 한 개 이상의 기저질환을 동반하고 있었고, 주요 기저질환 유형은 심혈관계 질환(29.0%), 당뇨병(13.9%) 순이었다. 온열질환 발생 시기는 7월 300명(56.9%), 8월 157명(29.8%)으로 나타나, 2024년도 8월 중심 발생(325명, 60.4%)에서 발생시기가 약 한 달 조기화되었다. 발생 장소는 실외가 80.5% (424명)로 실내 19.5% (103명)보다 약 4배 많았으며, 주중 발생률은 69.8% (368명)로 주말(159명, 30.2%)보다 약 2.3배 높았다.

3. 충청권 시군구별 온열질환 발생 현황

2025년 시군구별 온열질환 발생률 격차는 대전 동구 2.3명, 충북 옥천군 49.6명으로 약 21.6배를 나타냈다(그림 2). 2025년 충남 지역 온열질환 발생 상위 지역은 청양군(40.9명), 예산군(25.4명), 당진시(23.8명)로 전년과 동일하였으나, 충북 지역에서는 옥천군(49.6명), 단양군(40.6명), 보은군(36.2명) 순으로 발생률 상위 지역의 순서가 작년 대비 역순으로 나타났다(보충 그림 1B; available online). 대전 지역의 경우 2024년에 상위에 포함되었던 중구의 발생률이 8.5명에서 2025년 4.4명으로 감소한 것을 볼 수 있으며 세종은 8.4명으로 2024년과 유사하였다. 2025년 온열질환 추정 사망자가 발생한 지역은 충남 당진 2명, 청양 1명, 부여 1명, 공주 1명으로 모두 충남 지역이었으며, 2024년의 경우 충남 지역 5명, 충북 지역 1명 발생하였다.

그림 2. 충청권 시군구별 온열질환 발생현황(2025년).

그림 2

검정 숫자: 충청권(대전, 세종, 충북, 충남) 인구 10만 명당 온열질환자 수. 파란 숫자: 온열질환자의 기저질환(심뇌혈관질환, 당뇨병, 내분비계질환 등 만성질환) 동반율. 붉은 별표: 온열질환 추정사망자 발생 지역으로 당진시(2명), 청양군(1명), 공주시(1명), 부여군(1명).

4. 2025년 충청권 민감대상군별 온열질환 발생 현황

충청권의 온열질환 발생에 대한 취약성을 파악하기 위해 온열질환 발생자 중 민감집단을 분류하고 모식화하였다. 온열질환 민감대상군을 직업적, 사회적, 경제적, 신체적으로 분류하였으며 하위 집단으로 사업장 근로자, 야외활동자, 기초생활수급권자, 고령자 등 16개로 세분화하였다(보충 그림 2; available online).

전체 온열질환자 527명 중 민감대상군의 직업적 분류에는 292명이 포함되었으며, 사업장 근로자는 226명(42.8%), 농림어업 종사자 53명(10.1%), 군인 8명(1.5%), 이동 노동자 4명(0.8%) 순이었다(표 2). 경제적 분류에는 기초생활수급자 및 노숙인이 17명(3.2%)이었고, 신체적 특성에 따른 분류에 해당하는 60세 이상 고령자는 209명(39.7%), 만성질환자가 236명(44.8%)으로 확인되었다.

표 2. 2025년 충청권 민감대상군별 온열질환 발생 현황.

구분 온열질환 민감대상
직업군(n=292) 경제군(n=17) 신체군(n=446)
사업장근로자b) (n=226) 농어업 종사자(n=53) 이동 노동자(n=4) 외국인
노동자(n=1)
군인
(n=8)
기초생활수급자‧노숙인(n=17) 고령자(n=209) 장애인(n=1) 만성질환자(n=236)
연령
0–9 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
10–19 2 (0.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
20–29 27 (11.9) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 8 (100) 1 (5.9) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 9 (3.8)
30–39 37 (16.4) 4 (7.5) 1 (25.0) 1 (100) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 12 (5.1)
40–49 51 (22.6) 5 (9.4) 2 (50.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 0 (0.0) 1 (100) 27 (11.4)
50–59 48 (21.2) 8 (15.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 6 (35.3) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 41 (17.4)
60–69 49 (21.7) 14 (26.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (23.5) 99 (47.4) 0 (0.0) 58 (24.6)
70–79 10 (4.4) 12 (22.6) 1 (25.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 48 (23.0) 0 (0.0) 35 (14.8)
≥80 2 (0.9) 8 (15.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (23.5) 62 (29.7) 0 (0.0) 54 (22.9)
≥65 32 (14.2) 26 (49.1) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 7 (41.2) 157 (75.1) 0 (0.0) 119 (50.4)
진료결과
퇴원 185 (81.9) 39 (73.6) 3 (75.0) 1 (100) 2 (25.0) 11 (64.7) 148 (70.8) 1 (100) 170 (72.0)
병실입원/전원 35 (15.5) 10 (18.9) 1 (25.0) 0 (0) 3 (37.5) 3 (17.6) 49 (23.4) 0 (0.0) 55 (23.3)
중환자실 입원 6 (2.7) 3 (5.7) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (37.5) 2 (11.8) 9 (4.3) 0 (0.0) 8 (3.4)
사망 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 1 (5.9) 3 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.3)
온열질환 종류
열사병 12 (5.3) 9 (17.0) 1 (75.0) 0 (0) 4 (50.0) 11 (64.7) 39 (18.7) 1 (100) 38 (16.1)
열탈진 154 (68.1) 40 (75.5) 3 (25.0) 1 (100) 4 (50.0) 6 (35.3) 141 (67.5) 0 (0.0) 162 (68.6)
열경련 43 (19.0) 4 (7.5) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 15 (7.2) 0 (0.0) 25 (10.6)
열실신 13 (5.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 11 (5.3) 0 (0.0) 9 (3.8)
기타 4 (1.8) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.4) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.8)
발생장소a)
실내 46 (20.4) 12 (22.6) 1 (25.0) 0 (0) 1 (12.5) 0 (0.0) 34(16.3) 0 (0.0) 46 (19.5)
실외 180 (79.6) 41 (77.4) 3 (75.0) 1 (100) 7 (87.5) 17 (100) 175 (83.7) 1 (100) 190 (80.5)

단위: 명(%). a)발생장소 중 실내는 건물, 비닐하우스, 실내작업장, 기타 실내장소, 실외는 강가·해변, 길가, 논밭, 산, 실외작업장, 운동장(공원), 주거지 주변, 기타 실외장소를 포함. b)사업장근로자는 실내작업장과 실외작업장에서 발생한 온열질환자를 포함.

연령별로는 사업장 근로자(226명)의 경우 40대 청장년층의 발생 비율이 22.6%, 농림어업 종사자에서는 60대 비율이 49.1%로 가장 큰 비중을 차지하였다. 65세 이상의 경우 사업장 근로자 14.2%, 농림어업 종사자 49.1%를 차지하였다. 경제군에서는 50–59세와 60–69세에서 발생이 집중되었으며, 신체군은 60–69세와 80세 이상 고령층 발생이 높게 나타났다.

민감대상군을 진료결과별로 분류하면, 대부분의 그룹에서 90% 이상 퇴원 및 일반 입원으로 경증 또는 중등증으로 나타났다. 군인의 경우 전체 8명 중 중환자실 입원 비율이 37.5%, 경제군 중 기초생활수급자∙노숙자의 중환자실 입원 11.8%, 사망 5.9%로 나타났으며 고령자의 경우도 중환자실 입원 4.3%, 사망 1.4%로 나타났다. 군인과 기초생활수급자‧노숙인의 경우 중환자실 입원 비율이 다른 그룹에 비하여 상대적으로 높았지만, 발생자 수가 적어 결과 해석이 제한적이다.

온열질환 종류로는 사업장 근로자를 제외한 나머지 그룹에서 열사병과 열탈진이 80% 이상 차지하였다. 열사병 발생 비율은 군인의 경우 50%(4명)이었으며, 기초생활수급자‧노숙인에서 62.5%(10명)로 나타났다.

발생 장소는 대부분 실외에서 발생하였으며, 실내 발생은 상대적으로 적었다. 특히, 기초생활수급자‧노숙인의 경우 전원(17명) 실외 발생이었다.

5. 충청권 온열질환별 발생 현황 비교

2025년 충청권 온열질환 종류 중 열탈진이 358명(67.9%), 열경련 69명(13.1%), 열사병은 68명(12.9%)으로 나타났다(표 3). 열탈진은 충북 지역(47.8%)에서 발생 비율이 높았으며, 열사병과 열경련은 충남 지역이 각각 58.8%, 60.9%로 가장 높은 비율을 나타냈다. 연령 분포에서 열사병의 경우 60세 이상이 전체의 57.4%로 열탈진(39.4%), 열경련(21.4%)에 비해 고령층의 발생 비율이 높았다. 발생 시기는 열탈진(56.7%)과 열사병(61.8%), 열경련(55.1%) 모두 7월에 집중되었으며, 낮 시간대인 12–18시 사이에 50% 이상 발생하였다.

표 3. 2025년 충청권 온열질환별 환자 발생 비교 현황.

구분 열사병(n=68) 열탈진(n=358) 열경련(n=69)
발생지역
대전 4 (5.9) 30 (8.4) 8 (11.6)
세종 5 (7.4) 21 (5.9) 5 (7.2)
충북 19 (27.9) 171 (47.8) 14 (20.3)
충남 40 (58.8) 136 (38.0) 42 (60.9)
연령
0–19 2 (2.9) 22 (6.1) 2 (2.9)
20–39 13 (19.1) 88 (24.6) 12 (17.4)
40–59 14 (20.6) 107 (29.9) 40 (58.0)
60–79 24 (35.3) 100 (27.9) 14 (20.3)
≥80 15 (22.1) 41 (11.5) 1 (1.4)
발생시기  
5월 2 (2.9) 4 (1.1) 0 (0.0)
6월 11 (16.2) 34 (9.5) 4 (5.8)
7월 42 (61.8) 203 (56.7) 38 (55.1)
8월 11 (16.2) 109 (30.4) 24 (34.8)
9월 2 (2.9) 8 (2.2) 3 (4.3)
발생시간  
8:00–10:00 2 (2.9) 34 (9.5) 3 (4.3)
10:00–12:00 9 (13.2) 80 (22.3) 8 (11.6)
12:00–14:00 15 (22.1) 55 (15.4) 13 (18.8)
14:00–16:00 20 (29.4) 64 (17.9) 23 (33.3)
16:00–18:00 13 (19.1) 63 (17.6) 10 (14.5)
18:00 이후 9 (13.2) 62 (17.3) 12 (17.4)
진료결과  
퇴원 34 (50.0) 294 (82.1) 52 (75.4)
병실입원/전원 18 (26.5) 58 (16.2) 15 (21.7)
중환자실 입원 11 (16.2) 6 (1.7) 2 (2.9)
사망 5 (7.4) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0)
기저질환  
무 26 (38.2) 196 (54.7) 44 (63.8)
유a) 42 (61.8) 162 (45.3) 25 (36.2)
심혈관계 19 (27.9) 91 (25.4) 15 (21.7)
당뇨 18 (26.5) 46 (12.8) 7 (10.1)
뇌혈관 1 (1.5) 6 (1.7) 3 (4.3)
내분비계 1 (1.5) 7 (2.0) 0 (0.0)
치매 3 (4.4) 15 (4.2) 0 (0.0)
암 7 (10.3) 16 (4.5) 2 (2.9)
정신질환 1 (1.5) 4 (1.1) 0 (0.0)
호흡기 1 (1.5) 1 (0.3) 0 (0.0)

단위: 명(%). a)기저질환은 중복 가능하여, 비율의 합이 100%가 되지 않거나 100%를 초과할 수 있음.

진료 결과 항목에서는 열탈진 환자의 대부분(82.1%)이 퇴원한 반면 열경련은 75.4%, 열사병은 50.0%로 나타났다. 기저질환 동반율을 비교한 결과, 열사병 환자의 61.8%가 기저질환을 동반하고 있었으며 열탈진 45.3%, 열경련 36.2% 보다 높은 기저질환 동반율을 나타냈다. 동반 기저질환의 종류로는 열탈진, 열사병, 열경련 모두 심혈관계 질환, 당뇨 순으로 나타났다.

6. 2025년 충청권 온열질환 및 기저질환 발생 추이

2025년 온열질환자는 7월에 301명으로 가장 많이 발생하였고, 이후 8월 157명, 9월 13명으로 감소하였다(그림 3). 기저질환을 동반한 온열질환자의 발생 비율은 초기 감시기간인 5월부터 30% 이상을 기록하였으며 지속적으로 증가하여 9월에 53.8%를 나타냈다. 심혈관계 질환 동반율은 5월 16.7%에서 9월까지 20% 이상을 나타냈으며 당뇨를 동반한 온열질환자의 비율은 8월 15.3%, 9월 30.8%까지 증가하였다.

그림 3. 충청권 발생시기별 온열질환자 주요 기저질환 추이(2025).

그림 3

단위: 명, %

논 의

기후변화의 심각성을 인지하고 대응하기 위해서는 대중, 연구자, 정책 결정자 등 다양한 이해관계자의 기후보건에 대한 이해가 필요하다. 기후변화가 건강에 미치는 영향을 이해하고, 지역사회 대응지지 및 행동 실천으로 이어지기 위한 기후보건 리터러시(climate health literacy)가 대두되고 있다.

폭염에 의한 건강 영향은 지역적∙지리적∙인구사회학적 특성에 따라 건강 피해나 양상이 다르게 나타난다[13]. 최근 폭염 민감대상에 대한 근로자 보건조치(2025년 6월 시행) 및 여름철 자연재난 종합대책(2025년 5월) 등에도 불구하고 기존의 폭염 관련 정책 연구는 영유아, 노인 등을 대상으로 일부 수행되어 왔으나, 다양한 민감대상군에 대한 연구는 미비하다.

이에 따라 본 연구는 충청권(4개 시‧도 및 36개 시‧군‧구)의 온열질환 발생현황을 파악하고 지역별 건강격차에 대한 분석을 수행하였다. 기존 온열질환 응급실감시체계 모니터링 결과(전일 발생 온열질환자 수 집계 현황)와 달리 지역 인구수를 보정하여 인구 10만 명당 온열질환자 발생률을 산출하였다[14]. 이러한 지역통계 결과를 바탕으로 건강취약지역 및 민감군을 대상으로 지역사회 참여형 및 주민 밀착형 온열질환 예방교육∙홍보 전략을 수립∙추진할 계획이다. 충청권은 대도시와 농어촌 지역이 존재하여 지역 특성에 따른 격차 비교가 가능하다. 충북과 충남은 온도별 발생건수 차이가 나타나는데, 두 지역 간 평균기온은 유사하나 폭염‧열대야의 발생 시기‧일수, 강수일수‧강수량, 집중호우 등 차이를 확인하였다. 지리적‧지형적 기후특성 및 지역편차에 대한 심리사회학적 원인 분석 및 실태 파악 연구가 필요하다.

충청권 내 직업적 민감대상군은 전체 온열질환자의 약 55%였으며, 그 중 사업장 근로자가 전체 직업군의 77.4%를 차지하였다. 이는 장시간 고온 환경에 노출되는 노동자가 온열질환에 위험하다는 기존 연구결과와 일치한다[1]. 농림어업 종사자 중 온열질환 발생은 65세 이상 고령층에서 높았으며, 사업장 근로자의 온열질환 발생 연령대는 40–49세 중장년층이 많았다. 농림어업 종사자는 전체 직업군 중 두 번째로 높은 비중을 차지하며, 도시와 농어촌이 혼재된 충청권의 지역적 특성을 나타낸다. 군인의 경우 모두 20대였으며, 발생 건수는 전년 대비 33% 증가하였으나 발생자 수 집계는 제한적이다. 이는 군 온열질환 관련 학술지에서 최초 보고된 군부대 내 온열질환 발생 증가 경향과 일치한다[15].

충청권의 경우 전체 온열질환자 중 44.8%가 기저질환을 동반하고 있었으며, 기저질환 유형은 심혈관질환(29.0%)과 당뇨병(13.9%) 순으로 많았다. 기저질환 동반 비율은 5월 33.3%에서 9월 53.8%로 지속 증가하여, 폭염 집중 관리 기간인 7–8월뿐만 아니라 초여름(5–6월)부터 늦더위(9월) 이후에도 꾸준한 폭염 관리 필요성을 시사한다. 권역별 지자체와 합동으로 심혈관질환이나 당뇨 등 만성질환을 가진 지역 주민을 면밀히 파악하여 시군구별 교육‧홍보 계획의 수립‧추진이 필요하다.

폭염에 따른 건강 영향은 단일 자료원에 기반한 감시만으로는 발생 규모와 중증도 분포를 충분히 설명하는 데 한계가 있다. 본 연구에서 건강보험심사평가원 요양기관 소재지별 질병 세분류 통계(2020–2024년) 분석 결과, 온열질환 중 열탈진, 열사병 순으로 비중이 높았으며, 이는 응급실감시체계 분석 결과와 유사하였다(보충 표 1; available online) [16]. 이러한 점에서 본 연구 결과는 폭염 대응을 위한 다층적 자료의 연계‧분석 연구의 필요성을 시사한다.

이 분석은 충청권(4개 시‧도 및 36개 시‧군‧구) 단위의 기후보건 지역통계 산출을 통해 온열질환 건강 취약성을 파악하고 정리하였다는 점에서 그 의의가 있으나, 기후변화에 따른 건강 영향의 전체 발생 규모와 분포를 설명하는 데에는 제한점이 있다.

향후에는 국민건강보험공단, 건강보험심사평가원, 소방청 구급이송 자료 등 자료원을 확장하여 기후보건 민감집단 보호, 지역격차 요인 및 원인분석 등 심층 연구가 필요하며, 지역사회건강조사 및 급성심장정지 발생 등의 분석 접근도 필요하다.

충청권의 지역 단위 온열질환 발생 및 지역 간 건강격차를 제시하였고, 이 결과를 활용하여 지역참여형‧주민밀착형 교육 콘텐츠 개발 및 지역 건강리더 양성을 통한 지역사회 참여 및 인식도 제고를 기대한다.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    phwr-19-14-601-supple.pdf (650.7KB, pdf)

    Articles from Public Health Weekly Report are provided here courtesy of Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency

    RESOURCES