Contributions of common genetic variants to risk of schizophrenia among individuals of African and Latino ancestry.

Schizophrenia is a common, chronic and debilitating neuropsychiatric syndrome affecting tens of millions of individuals worldwide. While rare genetic variants play a role in the etiology of schizophrenia, most of the currently explained liability is within common variation, suggesting that variation predating the human diaspora out of Africa harbors a large fraction of the common variant attributable heritability. However, common variant association studies in schizophrenia have concentrated mainly on cohorts of European descent. We describe genome-wide association studies of 6152 cases and 3918 controls of admixed African ancestry, and of 1234 cases and 3090 controls of Latino ancestry, representing the largest such study in these populations to date. Combining results from the samples with African ancestry with summary statistics from the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) study of schizophrenia yielded seven newly genome-wide significant loci, and we identified an additional eight loci by incorporating the results from samples with Latino ancestry. Leveraging population differences in patterns of linkage disequilibrium, we achieve improved fine-mapping resolution at 22 previously reported and 4 newly significant loci. Polygenic risk score profiling revealed improved prediction based on trans-ancestry meta-analysis results for admixed African (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.032; liability R2 = 0.017; P < 10-52), Latino (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.089; liability R2 = 0.021; P < 10-58), and European individuals (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.089; liability R2 = 0.037; P < 10-113), further highlighting the advantages of incorporating data from diverse human populations.

Variation in the Practice of Central Venous Catheter and Chest Tube Insertions among Surgery Residents.

OBJECTIVES: Central venous catheter (CVC) and chest tube (CT) insertions are common bedside procedures frequently performed by surgery residents. Despite published guidelines, variability in the practice exists. We sought to characterize the surgery residents' practice patterns surrounding these two bedside procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over the last 1½ months of the academic year in 2012 and 2013, surgery residents across the US were surveyed online. Participants reported levels of agreement for 15 questions in a 5-point Likert scale format. RESULTS: A total of 219 residents completed the survey. Majority of residents agreed that they received appropriate education and training. Over half of the respondents reported that they did not have attending staff physician's supervision during the procedures. Junior residents felt less confident in performing CVC or CT insertions. Those younger than 29 years old and of female sex were also less confident in performing CT insertion. Although almost all residents reported using maximal sterile barrier precautions, 7% reported not securing their gowns and another 7% reported inadequate draping of patients. About ⅓ reported no hand cleansing before the procedures. Those from community programs compared to university programs less frequently used antibiotics. Sixty-five percent of residents reported routine use of ultrasound for CVC insertion. CONCLUSION: Surgery residents do not strictly adhere to the guidelines for CVC and CT insertions, and there is substantial variation in the practice of the procedures, which may contribute to complications associated with these procedures. This survey opens new areas for in-service education, feedback, and practices for these procedures to reduce the risk of complications, especially the infectious one.

Contribution of copy number variants to schizophrenia from a genome-wide study of 41,321 subjects.

Copy number variants (CNVs) have been strongly implicated in the genetic etiology of schizophrenia (SCZ). However, genome-wide investigation of the contribution of CNV to risk has been hampered by limited sample sizes. We sought to address this obstacle by applying a centralized analysis pipeline to a SCZ cohort of 21,094 cases and 20,227 controls. A global enrichment of CNV burden was observed in cases (odds ratio (OR) = 1.11, P = 5.7 × 10-15), which persisted after excluding loci implicated in previous studies (OR = 1.07, P = 1.7 × 10-6). CNV burden was enriched for genes associated with synaptic function (OR = 1.68, P = 2.8 × 10-11) and neurobehavioral phenotypes in mouse (OR = 1.18, P = 7.3 × 10-5). Genome-wide significant evidence was obtained for eight loci, including 1q21.1, 2p16.3 (NRXN1), 3q29, 7q11.2, 15q13.3, distal 16p11.2, proximal 16p11.2 and 22q11.2. Suggestive support was found for eight additional candidate susceptibility and protective loci, which consisted predominantly of CNVs mediated by nonallelic homologous recombination.

Impact of Type 1 Diabetes Technology on Family Members/Significant Others of People With Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to explore the impact of diabetes-related technology to ensure that such devices are used in a way that returns maximum benefit from a medical and psychological perspective. METHOD: Spouses and caregivers of people with type 1 diabetes were invited to complete an online questionnaire about their experiences with diabetes technologies used by their family members. Participants were recruited via the Glu online community website. Questions explored impact on daily living, frequency and severity of hypoglycemia, and diabetes-related distress. RESULTS: In all, 100 parents/caregivers and 74 partners participated in this survey. Average (mean) duration of living with a person with type 1 diabetes was 16 years (SD = 13) for partners, with duration of diabetes for children being 4.2 ± 3.2 years. Average duration of current therapy was 8.3 ± 7.3 years for adults and 3.4 ± 2.9 years for children. Of the participants, 86% partners and 82% parents/caregivers reported diabetes technology had made it easier for their family members to achieve blood glucose targets. Compared to partners, parents/caregivers reported more negative emotions (P < .001) and decreased well-being (P < .001) related to their family members type 1 diabetes. Diabetes-related distress was common, as was sleep disturbance associated with device alarms and fear of hypoglycemia. Reduced frequency and severity of hypoglycemia related to device use was reported by approximately half of participants. CONCLUSION: There is little doubt about the medical benefit of diabetes technologies and their uptake is increasing but some downsides were reported. Barriers to uptake of technologies lie beyond the mechanics of diabetes management. Supporting users in using diabetes technology to achieve the best possible glycemic control, in the context of their own life, is crucial. Furthermore, understanding these issues with input from the type 1 diabetes community including family members and caregivers will help innovation and design of new technology.