Effects of 3D-Printed Models and 3D Printed Pictures on Maternal- and Paternal-Fetal Attachment, Anxiety, and Depression.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of a 3D-printed model versus 3D printed pictures on maternal- and paternal-fetal attachment, pregnancy-related anxiety, and depression in parents in the third trimester. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University- and clinic-affiliated hospital system. PARTICIPANTS: Between August 2020 and July 2021, we screened 419 women for eligibility. A total of 184 participants (n = 95 women and n = 89 men) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, of whom 47 women and 44 men received the 3D-printed model, whereas 48 women and 45 men received the 3D printed picture. METHODS: Participants completed a set of questionnaires before they received third trimester 3D ultrasonography and a second set of questionnaires approximately 14 days after the study ultrasonography. The primary outcome was the global Maternal and Paternal Antenatal Attachment scale scores. Secondary outcomes included the Maternal and Paternal Antenatal Attachment subscale scores, global Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scores, global Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores, and global Pregnancy-Related Anxiety Questionnaire-Revised (second version) scores. We used multilevel models to estimate the effect of the intervention. RESULTS: We found a statistically significant increase in mean attachment scores after the 3D printed picture and 3D-printed model intervention of 0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.22, 0.31], p < .001. Additionally, we found statistically significant improvement in depression (mean change = -1.08, 95% CI [-1.54, -0.62], p < .001), generalized anxiety (mean change = -1.38, 95% CI [-1.87, -0.89], p < .001), and pregnancy-related anxiety (mean change = -2.92, 95% CI [-4.11, -1.72], p < .001) scores. We found no statistically significant between-group differences related to maternal or paternal attachment, anxiety, depression, or pregnancy-related anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of 3D printed pictures and 3D-printed models to improve prenatal attachment, anxiety, depression, and pregnancy-related anxiety.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Effects of Time on Compliance and Driving Pressures in ARDS.

BACKGROUND: The evolution of compliance and driving pressure in ARDS and the effects of time spent on noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation have not been well studied. We conducted this study to assess the effect of the duration of noninvasive respiratory support prior to intubation (ie, noninvasive ventilation [NIV], high-flow nasal cannula [HFNC], or a combination of NIV and HFNC) on static compliance and driving pressure and retrospectively describe its trajectory over time for COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 ARDS while on mechanical ventilation. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from one university-affiliated academic medical center, one rural magnet hospital, and 3 suburban community facilities. A total of 589 subjects were included: 55 COVID-19 positive, 137 culture positive, and 397 culture-negative subjects. Static compliance and driving pressure were calculated at each 8-h subject-ventilator assessment. RESULTS: Days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support were associated with worse compliance and driving pressure but did not moderate any trajectory. COVID-19-positive subjects showed non-statistically significant worsening compliance by 0.08 units per subject-ventilator assessment (P = .24), whereas COVID-19-negative subjects who were either culture positive or negative showed statistically significant improvement (0.12 and 0.18, respectively; both P < .05); a statistically similar but inverse pattern was observed for driving pressure. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to non-COVID-19 ARDS, COVID-19 ARDS was associated with a more ominous trajectory with no improvement in static compliance or driving pressures. Though there was no association between days of pre-intubation noninvasive respiratory support and mortality, its use was associated with worse overall compliance and driving pressure.

Impact of Performance Status on Response and Survival Among Patients Receiving Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials, which led to the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), have been almost exclusively performed in patients with good Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS of 0-1). However, ICI remains an attractive option for patients with advanced tumors and poor PS. We hypothesized that patients with ECOG PS ≥ 2 would have worse outcomes with ICI. METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with advanced solid tumors who were treated with ICI at our institution. The log-rank test compared the survival among patients with different ECOG PS. We used a proportional hazards model to assess association between ECOG PS and overall survival (OS) with adjustment for covariates including age, sex, malignancy type, time from advance disease diagnosis, and line of therapy. We compared overall response rates between groups with Pearson chi-square exact test. We also analyzed in-hospital mortality and hospice referral rates. RESULTS: We identified 257 patients treated with ICI. One hundred eighty-two patients had ECOG PS 0-1, and 75 had ECOG PS ≥ 2. The median overall survival was 12.6 months for the ECOG PS 0-1 group compared with 3.1 months for the ECOG PS ≥ 2 group (P < .001). The overall response rate for patients with ECOG PS 0-1 was 23% compared with 8% for those with poor PS (P = .005). Patients with poor PS treated with ICI had similar hospice referral rates (67% for ECOG PS ≥ 2 v 61.9% for ECOG PS 0-1, P = .50) but were more likely to have in-hospital death as compared with the good PS group (28.6% v 15.1%, P = .035). CONCLUSION: Despite the appeal of ICI in patients with advanced malignancy and poor PS, outcomes in this cohort were poor. Prospective trials defining the activity and role of ICI in poor PS are urgently needed.