Individual association analyses were conducted in each stratum an

Individual association analyses were conducted in each stratum and meta-analyzed across all 15 discovery data sets. Seventy-six (72 independent) single nucleotide

polymorphisms were taken forward for in silico (two data sets) or de novo (13 data sets) replication genotyping in 2677 independent AN cases and 8629 European ancestry controls along with 458 AN cases and 421 controls from Japan. The final global meta-analysis across discovery and replication data sets comprised 5551 AN cases and 21 080 controls. AN subtype analyses (1606 AN restricting; 1445 AN binge-purge) were performed. No findings reached genome-wide significance. Two intronic variants were suggestively associated: rs9839776 (P = 3.01 x 10(-7)) in SOX2OT and rs17030795 (P = 5.84 x 10(-6)) in PPP3CA. Two additional signals were specific to Europeans: rs1523921 (P = 5.76 x 10(-6))

between CUL3 click here and FAM124B and rs1886797 (P = 8.05 x 10(-6)) near SPATA13. Comparing discovery with replication results, 76% of the effects were in the same direction, an observation highly unlikely to be due to chance (P= 4×10(-6)), strongly suggesting that true findings exist but our sample, the largest yet reported, was underpowered for their detection. The accrual of large genotyped AN case-control samples should be an immediate priority for the field.”
“Background De-escalation techniques are a recommended non-physical intervention for the management of violence and GSK2245840 nmr aggression in mental health. Although taught as part of mandatory training for all National Health Service (NHS) mental health staff, there remains a lack of clarity around training effectiveness. Aims To conduct a systematic review of the learning, performance and clinical safety outcomes of de-escalation techniques training. Method The review process involved a systematic literature search of 20 electronic databases, eligibility screening of results,

data extraction, quality appraisal and data synthesis. Results A total of 38 relevant studies were identified. The strongest impact of training appears to be on de-escalation-related knowledge, confidence to manage aggression and deescalation performance (although limited to artificial training scenarios). No strong conclusions could be drawn about the impact of training on assaults, injuries, containment and organisational outcomes owing to the low quality of evidence and conflicting results. Conclusions It is assumed that de-escalation techniques training will improve staff’s ability to de-escalate violent and aggressive behaviour and improve safety in practice. There is currently limited evidence that this training has these effects. Copyright and usage (C) The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2015.

Comments are closed.