The hidden severity of new psychoactive substances: clinical evidence from emergency and intensive care admissions in Taiwan.

IF 6.9 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Annals of Intensive Care Pub Date : 2026-09-28 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.aicoj.2026.100163
Po-Hsiang Liao, Chih-Chuan Lin, Chia-Ming Chang, Sung-Wei Liu, Te-I Weng, Hsien-Yi Chen, Cheng-Chung Fang, Jiun-Hao Yu, Yu-Jang Su, Yen-Chia Chen
{"title":"The hidden severity of new psychoactive substances: clinical evidence from emergency and intensive care admissions in Taiwan.","authors":"Po-Hsiang Liao, Chih-Chuan Lin, Chia-Ming Chang, Sung-Wei Liu, Te-I Weng, Hsien-Yi Chen, Cheng-Chung Fang, Jiun-Hao Yu, Yu-Jang Su, Yen-Chia Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.aicoj.2026.100163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>New psychoactive substances (NPS) have emerged as a growing threat in Taiwan, yet their clinical severity compared with traditional illicit drugs (TID) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and critical outcomes between patients with NPS and TID poisoning confirmed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study across 10 hospitals within six medical systems in Taiwan. Between March 2019 and January 2020, 1,378 patients with suspected drug intoxication underwent urine LC-MS/MS analysis at certified toxicology laboratories. A total of 362 patients (26.3%) tested positive, including 147 (40.6%) with NPSs, 130 (35.9%) with TIDs, and 85 (23.5%) with mixed substances.Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected through a chart review. Synthetic cathinones and ketamine analogs were the most frequently detected NPSs, whereas methamphetamine/amphetamine and morphine were predominant among TID cases. Critical outcomes were defined as intensive care unit admission or death in the emergency department. The overall rate of critical outcomes was 18.3% (252/1,378). The odds of critical illness did not significantly differ between NPS and TID users (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.74). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed no significant difference in short-term survival among the NPS, TID, and mixed-drug groups (log-rank p = 0.665).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No statistically significant difference in clinical severity or mortality risk was observed between NPS and TID poisoning. These findings highlight that NPS exposure has a similar potential for critical illness and should be managed with the same clinical vigilance as conventional drug poisoning.</p>","PeriodicalId":7966,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Intensive Care","volume":"16 ","pages":"100163"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13677263/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aicoj.2026.100163","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: New psychoactive substances (NPS) have emerged as a growing threat in Taiwan, yet their clinical severity compared with traditional illicit drugs (TID) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the clinical characteristics and critical outcomes between patients with NPS and TID poisoning confirmed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).

Methods and results: We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study across 10 hospitals within six medical systems in Taiwan. Between March 2019 and January 2020, 1,378 patients with suspected drug intoxication underwent urine LC-MS/MS analysis at certified toxicology laboratories. A total of 362 patients (26.3%) tested positive, including 147 (40.6%) with NPSs, 130 (35.9%) with TIDs, and 85 (23.5%) with mixed substances.Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected through a chart review. Synthetic cathinones and ketamine analogs were the most frequently detected NPSs, whereas methamphetamine/amphetamine and morphine were predominant among TID cases. Critical outcomes were defined as intensive care unit admission or death in the emergency department. The overall rate of critical outcomes was 18.3% (252/1,378). The odds of critical illness did not significantly differ between NPS and TID users (adjusted odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-1.74). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed no significant difference in short-term survival among the NPS, TID, and mixed-drug groups (log-rank p = 0.665).

Conclusions: No statistically significant difference in clinical severity or mortality risk was observed between NPS and TID poisoning. These findings highlight that NPS exposure has a similar potential for critical illness and should be managed with the same clinical vigilance as conventional drug poisoning.

新型精神活性物质的潜在严重性:台湾急症与重症监护入院的临床证据。
背景:新型精神活性物质(NPS)在台湾已成为日益严重的威胁,但与传统非法药物(TID)相比,其临床严重程度仍不确定。本研究旨在比较液相色谱-串联质谱(LC-MS/MS)证实的NPS和TID中毒患者的临床特征和关键结局。方法与结果:我们在台湾6个医疗系统的10家医院进行了一项多中心回顾性队列研究。在2019年3月至2020年1月期间,1,378名疑似药物中毒的患者在认证毒理学实验室接受了尿液LC-MS/MS分析。阳性362例(26.3%),其中nps 147例(40.6%),TIDs 130例(35.9%),混合用药85例(23.5%)。通过图表回顾收集了人口统计、临床和实验室数据。合成卡西酮类和氯胺酮类似物是最常见的nps,而甲基苯丙胺/安非他明和吗啡在TID病例中占主导地位。关键结局被定义为重症监护病房入住或在急诊科死亡。关键结局的总发生率为18.3%(252/ 1378)。NPS和TID使用者患危重疾病的几率无显著差异(校正优势比为0.94;95%可信区间[CI], 0.51-1.74)。Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示,NPS组、TID组和混合用药组的短期生存无显著差异(log-rank p = 0.665)。结论:NPS与TID中毒在临床严重程度和死亡风险方面无统计学差异。这些发现突出表明,NPS暴露具有类似的危重疾病可能性,应像常规药物中毒一样以同样的临床警惕性进行管理。
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
Annals of Intensive Care
Annals of Intensive Care CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
107
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Intensive Care is an online peer-reviewed journal that publishes high-quality review articles and original research papers in the field of intensive care medicine. It targets critical care providers including attending physicians, fellows, residents, nurses, and physiotherapists, who aim to enhance their knowledge and provide optimal care for their patients. The journal's articles are included in various prestigious databases such as CAS, Current contents, DOAJ, Embase, Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition, OCLC, PubMed, PubMed Central, Science Citation Index Expanded, SCOPUS, and Summon by Serial Solutions.
×
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
小红书