Time filter

Source Type

Södertälje, Sweden

Carlsson S.,Dependence Clinic Vastmanland | Olsson R.,Dependence Clinic Vastmanland | Lindkvist I.,Dependence Clinic Vastmanland | Beck O.,Karolinska University Hospital
Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation

Aim. Exhaled breath has recently been identified as a possible matrix for drug testing. This study explored the potential of this new method for compliance monitoring of patients being treated for dependence disorders. Methods. Outpatients in treatment programs were recruited for this study. Urine was collected as part of clinical routine and a breath sample was collected in parallel together with a questionnaire about their views of the testing procedure. Urine was analyzed for amphetamines, benzodiazepines, cannabis, cocaine, buprenorphine, methadone and opiates using CEDIA immunochemical screening and mass spectrometry confirmation. The exhaled breath was collected using the SensAbues device and analyzed by mass spectrometry for amphetamine, methamphetamine, diazepam, oxazepam, tetrahydrocannabinol, cocaine, benzoylecgonine, buprenorphine, methadone, morphine, codeine and 6-acetylmorphine. Results. A total of 122 cases with parallel urine and breath samples were collected; 34 of these were negative both in urine and breath. Out of 88 cases with positive urine samples 51 (58%) were also positive in breath. Among the patients on methadone treatment, all were positive for methadone in urine and 83% were positive in breath. Among patients in treatment with buprenorphine, 92% were positive in urine and among those 80% were also positive in breath. The questionnaire response documented that in general, patients accepted drug testing well and that the breath sampling procedure was preferred. Conclusion. Compliance testing for the intake of prescribed and unprescribed drugs among patients in treatment for dependence disorders using the exhaled breath sampling technique is a viable method and deserves future attention. © 2015 Informa Healthcare. Source

Beck O.,Karolinska Institutet | Carlsson S.,Dependence Clinic Vastmanland | Tusic M.,Swedish Poisons Information Center | Olsson R.,Dependence Clinic Vastmanland | And 2 more authors.
Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation

Aim. Products for on-site urine drug testing offer the possibility to perform screening for drugs of abuse directly at the point-of-care. This is a well-established routine in emergency and dependency clinics but further evaluation of performance is needed due to inherent limitations with the available products. Methods. Urine drug testing by an on-site product was compared with routine laboratory methods. First, on-site testing was performed at the laboratory in addition to the routine method. Second, the on-site testing was performed at a dependency clinic and urine samples were subsequently sent to the laboratory for additional analytical investigation. Results. The on-site testing products did not perform with assigned cut-off levels. The subjective reading between the presence of a spot (i.e. negative test result) being present or no spot (positive result) was difficult in 3.2% of the cases, and occurred for all parameters. The tests performed more accurately in drug negative samples (specificity 96%) but less accurately for detecting positives (sensitivity 79%). Of all incorrect results by the on-site test the proportion of false negatives was 42%. The overall agreement between on-site and laboratory testing was 95% in the laboratory study and 98% in the clinical study. Conclusion. Although a high degree of agreement was observed between on-site and routine laboratory urine drug testing, the performance of on-site testing was not acceptable due to significant number of false negative results. The limited sensitivity of on-site testing compared to laboratory testing reduces the applicability of these tests. © 2014 Informa Healthcare. Source

Discover hidden collaborations