Urine Samples Tampering Pattern for Drugs of Abuse Testing: Experience of the Saudi Arabia Poison Control Centers

A. Ragab, Raed A Al-khayyal, Fawaz Al-Mousa, Ahmed Bahriz
{"title":"Urine Samples Tampering Pattern for Drugs of Abuse Testing: Experience of the Saudi Arabia Poison Control Centers","authors":"A. Ragab, Raed A Al-khayyal, Fawaz Al-Mousa, Ahmed Bahriz","doi":"10.4172/2155-6105.1000355","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, urine substance of abuse (SOA) testing in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings has become common in many countries all over the world. There have been multiple published research recommending the performance of the urine sample validity test (SVT) for substance of abuse testing administered in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings. On the opposite side, very little researches focusing on variable procedures of urine adulteration in (SOA) testing process, including diluted, substituted, adulterated, and invalid tests. The current research investigated 7985 submitted urine drug test samples for sample validity test from pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings in Saudi Arabia over one year. All preliminary immunoassay screen-positive urine sample drug tests were confirmed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry. This article found that the prevalence of tampering (diluted, substituted, or invalid tests) in urine samples from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings were 0.87% and 0.69%, respectively. The percentage of diluted, substituted, adulterated and invalid urine specimens from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected cases were 75%, 21.4%, 1.7%, 1.7% and 63.6%, 36.4%, 0%, 0% respectively. The most common substance of abuse detected from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected specimens were cannabis, followed by amphetamines. We recommend that all urine samples taken for substance of abuse testing from both the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings need to be investigated for validity.","PeriodicalId":14828,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Addiction Research and Therapy","volume":"90 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Addiction Research and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6105.1000355","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Recently, urine substance of abuse (SOA) testing in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings has become common in many countries all over the world. There have been multiple published research recommending the performance of the urine sample validity test (SVT) for substance of abuse testing administered in the pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings. On the opposite side, very little researches focusing on variable procedures of urine adulteration in (SOA) testing process, including diluted, substituted, adulterated, and invalid tests. The current research investigated 7985 submitted urine drug test samples for sample validity test from pre-employment/workplace and suspected SOA settings in Saudi Arabia over one year. All preliminary immunoassay screen-positive urine sample drug tests were confirmed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography/mass spectrophotometry. This article found that the prevalence of tampering (diluted, substituted, or invalid tests) in urine samples from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings were 0.87% and 0.69%, respectively. The percentage of diluted, substituted, adulterated and invalid urine specimens from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected cases were 75%, 21.4%, 1.7%, 1.7% and 63.6%, 36.4%, 0%, 0% respectively. The most common substance of abuse detected from the pre-employment/workplace and suspected specimens were cannabis, followed by amphetamines. We recommend that all urine samples taken for substance of abuse testing from both the pre-employment/workplace and suspected settings need to be investigated for validity.
滥用药物检测尿样篡改模式:沙特阿拉伯中毒控制中心的经验
最近,在世界上许多国家,在就业前/工作场所和疑似SOA环境中进行尿液滥用物质(SOA)测试已经变得普遍。已发表的多项研究建议在就业前/工作场所和疑似SOA环境中使用尿样效度测试(SVT)进行药物滥用测试。另一方面,对于(SOA)测试过程中尿液掺假的可变过程,包括稀释、替代、掺假和无效测试的研究却很少。本研究调查了7985份来自沙特阿拉伯就业前/工作场所和疑似SOA环境的尿检样本,用于样本效度测试。所有初步免疫分析筛选阳性尿样药物试验均通过气相色谱/质谱法和液相色谱/质分光光度法确认。本文发现,在就业前/工作场所和可疑场所的尿液样本中,篡改(稀释、替代或无效检测)的发生率分别为0.87%和0.69%。在职前/工作场所尿液稀释、替代、掺假和无效标本及疑似病例比例分别为75%、21.4%、1.7%、1.7%和63.6%、36.4%、0%、0%。在就业前/工作场所和疑似样本中发现的最常见滥用物质是大麻,其次是安非他明。我们建议,所有用于药物滥用测试的尿样,包括就业前/工作场所和疑似场所的尿样,都需要进行有效性调查。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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