The performance of saliva test strips for determining ethanol levels, as compared to gas chromatography and breathalyser methods.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Niklas Wargh, Juha Piltti, Pirjo Hedberg
{"title":"The performance of saliva test strips for determining ethanol levels, as compared to gas chromatography and breathalyser methods.","authors":"Niklas Wargh,&nbsp;Juha Piltti,&nbsp;Pirjo Hedberg","doi":"10.1080/00365513.2023.2255970","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We set out to determine the performance of the Testi Technologies enzymatic assay saliva ethanol test strips of three different detection levels: 0 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.5 g/L, using as the reference method a gas chromatography analyser (GC). Alcohol levels were measured in 104 volunteers at up to three points in time, using up to three test strips per measurement, while gathering blood samples and breathalyser readings in parallel. The plasma alcohol concentrations (PAC) were determined from the plasma samples using GC. The qualitative results of the test strips were compared to the quantitative results from the reference method, as well as the breathalyser readings, and the amount of true and false positive and true and false negative results were classified using predetermined cut-off levels. The best performing test strips were the 0 g/L and the 0.2 g/L strips. The 0 g/L strips had a sensitivity and specificity of 1.00, as false negatives and false positives were not detected. The 0.2 g/L strips had a sensitivity and specificity [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 0.98 (0.96 - 1.00) and 0.83 (0.62 - 1.00) respectively, an accuracy of 0.97 (0.95 - 0.99), and a diagnostic odds ratio of 205.00 (35.33 - 1189.66). The test strips perform their intended purpose of screening for alcohol consumption well, with their great sensitivity as a defining property compared to other testing methods. For them to be able to be implemented in a clinical setting however, further refinement of the tests' characteristics would be required.</p>","PeriodicalId":21474,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"432-438"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2023.2255970","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We set out to determine the performance of the Testi Technologies enzymatic assay saliva ethanol test strips of three different detection levels: 0 g/L, 0.2 g/L and 0.5 g/L, using as the reference method a gas chromatography analyser (GC). Alcohol levels were measured in 104 volunteers at up to three points in time, using up to three test strips per measurement, while gathering blood samples and breathalyser readings in parallel. The plasma alcohol concentrations (PAC) were determined from the plasma samples using GC. The qualitative results of the test strips were compared to the quantitative results from the reference method, as well as the breathalyser readings, and the amount of true and false positive and true and false negative results were classified using predetermined cut-off levels. The best performing test strips were the 0 g/L and the 0.2 g/L strips. The 0 g/L strips had a sensitivity and specificity of 1.00, as false negatives and false positives were not detected. The 0.2 g/L strips had a sensitivity and specificity [95% confidence interval (CI)] of 0.98 (0.96 - 1.00) and 0.83 (0.62 - 1.00) respectively, an accuracy of 0.97 (0.95 - 0.99), and a diagnostic odds ratio of 205.00 (35.33 - 1189.66). The test strips perform their intended purpose of screening for alcohol consumption well, with their great sensitivity as a defining property compared to other testing methods. For them to be able to be implemented in a clinical setting however, further refinement of the tests' characteristics would be required.

唾液测试条测定乙醇含量的性能,与气相色谱法和酒精测试法相比。
我们着手确定Testi Technologies酶法唾液乙醇测试条的性能,测试条具有三种不同的检测水平:0 g/L,0.2 g/L和0.5 g/L,使用气相色谱分析仪(GC)作为参考方法。104名志愿者在多达三个时间点测量了酒精水平,每次测量最多使用三条测试条,同时并行收集血液样本和酒精测试仪读数。使用GC从血浆样品中测定血浆酒精浓度(PAC)。将测试条的定性结果与参考方法的定量结果以及酒精测试仪读数进行比较,并使用预定的截止水平对真阳性和假阳性以及真阴性和假阴性结果的数量进行分类。性能最好的测试条是0 g/L和0.2 g/L条。0 g/L试纸条的灵敏度和特异性为1.00,因为未检测到假阴性和假阳性。0.2 g/L试纸条的敏感性和特异性[95%置信区间(CI)]为0.98(0.96 - 1.00)和0.83(0.62 - 1.00),精度为0.97(0.95 - 0.99),诊断优势比为205.00(35.33 - 1189.66)。与其他测试方法相比,测试条具有很高的灵敏度,可以很好地实现其筛查酒精消耗的预期目的。然而,为了使其能够在临床环境中实施,还需要进一步完善测试的特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
85
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation is an international scientific journal covering clinically oriented biochemical and physiological research. Since the launch of the journal in 1949, it has been a forum for international laboratory medicine, closely related to, and edited by, The Scandinavian Society for Clinical Chemistry. The journal contains peer-reviewed articles, editorials, invited reviews, and short technical notes, as well as several supplements each year. Supplements consist of monographs, and symposium and congress reports covering subjects within clinical chemistry and clinical physiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信