Understanding and addressing bias in urine drug screening protocols on high-volume labor and delivery units.

Q2 Medicine
Megan Kalata, G Sotolongo, L Ahlers, L Byrne, O Doll, O Foley, G Folino, K Hermann, M Maglasang, N Perme, A Van Cleave
{"title":"Understanding and addressing bias in urine drug screening protocols on high-volume labor and delivery units.","authors":"Megan Kalata, G Sotolongo, L Ahlers, L Byrne, O Doll, O Foley, G Folino, K Hermann, M Maglasang, N Perme, A Van Cleave","doi":"10.1177/19345798251349418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to understand the current demographics and characteristics of patients undergoing urine drug screening on labor and delivery units with the intention of using this data to create a more evidence-based, equitable policy to reduce bias in the screening process.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed of 509 instances of drug screening occurring for pregnant and recently delivered patients across three hospitals in Omaha, Nebraska. Demographics of patients, including age, race, ethnicity, and insurance status, as well as reasons for drug screening, patient consent, screening results, and disclosure of results, were analyzed to assess patterns in screening.Results509 screening instances were evaluated with 324 unique patients. While Black patients made up 11.6% of the overall patient population, they accounted for 26.2% of the patients undergoing urine drug screenings. 2.88% of all patients self-identified as Hispanic; however, they comprised 13.4% of all patients screened. Consent was documented in 11.3% of cases and a reason for obtaining UDS was documented in 61.5% of cases. The most common reasons cited were history of substance use or current use, medical indications, and suspected use without documented history of use.ConclusionsEstablishment of more specific, evidence-based policies for urine drug screening may reduce the impact of implicit biases on current screening practices and serve as one avenue to rebuild trust with patients who have historically been marginalized by the medical community.</p>","PeriodicalId":16537,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","volume":" ","pages":"19345798251349418"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19345798251349418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to understand the current demographics and characteristics of patients undergoing urine drug screening on labor and delivery units with the intention of using this data to create a more evidence-based, equitable policy to reduce bias in the screening process.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed of 509 instances of drug screening occurring for pregnant and recently delivered patients across three hospitals in Omaha, Nebraska. Demographics of patients, including age, race, ethnicity, and insurance status, as well as reasons for drug screening, patient consent, screening results, and disclosure of results, were analyzed to assess patterns in screening.Results509 screening instances were evaluated with 324 unique patients. While Black patients made up 11.6% of the overall patient population, they accounted for 26.2% of the patients undergoing urine drug screenings. 2.88% of all patients self-identified as Hispanic; however, they comprised 13.4% of all patients screened. Consent was documented in 11.3% of cases and a reason for obtaining UDS was documented in 61.5% of cases. The most common reasons cited were history of substance use or current use, medical indications, and suspected use without documented history of use.ConclusionsEstablishment of more specific, evidence-based policies for urine drug screening may reduce the impact of implicit biases on current screening practices and serve as one avenue to rebuild trust with patients who have historically been marginalized by the medical community.

理解和解决在大容量产程和分娩单位尿液药物筛选方案中的偏见。
本研究的目的是了解目前在产房进行尿液药物筛查的患者的人口统计学和特征,目的是利用这些数据创建一个更循证、公平的政策,以减少筛查过程中的偏见。方法对内布拉斯加州奥马哈市3家医院的509例孕妇和刚分娩的患者进行药物筛查回顾性分析。分析患者的人口统计数据,包括年龄、种族、民族和保险状况,以及药物筛选的原因、患者同意、筛查结果和结果披露,以评估筛查模式。结果共筛选病例509例,特殊病例324例。虽然黑人患者占总患者人数的11.6%,但他们占接受尿液药物筛查患者的26.2%。2.88%的患者自认为是西班牙裔;然而,他们占所有筛查患者的13.4%。11.3%的病例记录了同意,61.5%的病例记录了获得UDS的原因。引用的最常见原因是药物使用史或当前使用史、医学指征和无使用史记录的怀疑使用。结论建立更具体、更循证的尿液药物筛查政策可以减少当前筛查实践中隐性偏见的影响,并作为重建历史上被医学界边缘化的患者信任的一种途径。
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
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine
Journal of neonatal-perinatal medicine Medicine-Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
124
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信