慢性疼痛患者指戳血浆药物检测:指戳血浆与尿液配对比较

MP George, Irving Texas Usa Firstox Laboratories, R. George, Jessica Almonds
{"title":"慢性疼痛患者指戳血浆药物检测:指戳血浆与尿液配对比较","authors":"MP George, Irving Texas Usa Firstox Laboratories, R. George, Jessica Almonds","doi":"10.17140/tfmoj-5-131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim A clinical study was conducted to evaluate fingerstick blood as a viable biological matrix for monitoring prescription and illicit drugs in a clinical setting on patients undergoing pain and addiction treatment. The current standard for monitoring patients’ medication use, misuse, and diversion is urine drug testing (UDT). Materials and Methods This study compared 632 paired urine and fingerstick blood specimens collected at three pain management clinics and one suboxone clinic for 35 drugs and/or metabolites. Plasma from the fingerstick blood was used for the analysis. The urine and plasma specimens were analyzed by validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) procedures. The urine cutoff used by most pain testing laboratories were used to identify positive and negative drugs in urine. Limit of quantitation was used to identify positive and negative drugs in plasma. Drugs and/or metabolites were quantified in both urine and plasma using deuterium-labeled internal standards. Results Results were tabulated for urine and plasma specimens for data analysis. The results showed that 8.7% of plasma specimens detected more drugs compared to the corresponding urine specimens, and 2.2% of the urine specimens detected a drug that was negative in the corresponding plasma specimen. Overall 89.1% of the specimens had complete agreement between urine and plasma specimens for detection. The observed Cohen’s Kappa value for overall drug detection was 0.96 an “almost perfect” agreement as characterized by Landis and Koch. Conclusion Based on the observed data, the authors conclude that plasma collected from fingerstick blood is a better matrix to monitor patients currently prescribed pain medications or patients currently undergoing medication-assisted opioid treatment compared to urine drug testing.","PeriodicalId":92966,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology and forensic medicine : open journal","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fingerstick Plasma Drug Testing of Chronic Pain Patients: Comparison of Paired Fingerstick Plasma and Urine Specimens\",\"authors\":\"MP George, Irving Texas Usa Firstox Laboratories, R. George, Jessica Almonds\",\"doi\":\"10.17140/tfmoj-5-131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim A clinical study was conducted to evaluate fingerstick blood as a viable biological matrix for monitoring prescription and illicit drugs in a clinical setting on patients undergoing pain and addiction treatment. The current standard for monitoring patients’ medication use, misuse, and diversion is urine drug testing (UDT). Materials and Methods This study compared 632 paired urine and fingerstick blood specimens collected at three pain management clinics and one suboxone clinic for 35 drugs and/or metabolites. Plasma from the fingerstick blood was used for the analysis. The urine and plasma specimens were analyzed by validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) procedures. The urine cutoff used by most pain testing laboratories were used to identify positive and negative drugs in urine. Limit of quantitation was used to identify positive and negative drugs in plasma. Drugs and/or metabolites were quantified in both urine and plasma using deuterium-labeled internal standards. Results Results were tabulated for urine and plasma specimens for data analysis. The results showed that 8.7% of plasma specimens detected more drugs compared to the corresponding urine specimens, and 2.2% of the urine specimens detected a drug that was negative in the corresponding plasma specimen. Overall 89.1% of the specimens had complete agreement between urine and plasma specimens for detection. The observed Cohen’s Kappa value for overall drug detection was 0.96 an “almost perfect” agreement as characterized by Landis and Koch. Conclusion Based on the observed data, the authors conclude that plasma collected from fingerstick blood is a better matrix to monitor patients currently prescribed pain medications or patients currently undergoing medication-assisted opioid treatment compared to urine drug testing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicology and forensic medicine : open journal\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicology and forensic medicine : open journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17140/tfmoj-5-131\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology and forensic medicine : open journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17140/tfmoj-5-131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的通过一项临床研究,评估手指刺血作为一种可行的生物基质,在临床环境中监测正在接受疼痛和成瘾治疗的患者的处方药和非法药物。目前监测患者药物使用、滥用和转移的标准是尿液药物检测(UDT)。材料与方法本研究比较了在3个疼痛管理诊所和1个suboxone诊所收集的632对尿液和手指血样本,检测35种药物和/或代谢物。手指刺血中的血浆被用于分析。尿液和血浆标本采用经验证的液相色谱-串联质谱(LC-MS-MS)方法进行分析。大多数疼痛检测实验室采用尿切断法来鉴别尿中药物的阳性和阴性。用定量限法鉴别血浆中阳性和阴性药物。使用氘标记内标对尿液和血浆中的药物和/或代谢物进行定量。结果将尿液和血浆标本结果制成表格,进行数据分析。结果显示,8.7%的血浆标本比相应尿液标本检出更多的药物,2.2%的尿液标本检出相应血浆标本中阴性的药物。总的来说,89.1%的标本尿液和血浆标本的检测结果完全一致。观察到的总体药物检测的Cohen’s Kappa值为0.96,与Landis和Koch所描述的“几乎完美”一致。根据观察到的数据,作者得出结论,与尿液药物检测相比,从手指刺血中收集的血浆是一种更好的基质,用于监测正在服用止痛药或正在接受药物辅助阿片类药物治疗的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fingerstick Plasma Drug Testing of Chronic Pain Patients: Comparison of Paired Fingerstick Plasma and Urine Specimens
Aim A clinical study was conducted to evaluate fingerstick blood as a viable biological matrix for monitoring prescription and illicit drugs in a clinical setting on patients undergoing pain and addiction treatment. The current standard for monitoring patients’ medication use, misuse, and diversion is urine drug testing (UDT). Materials and Methods This study compared 632 paired urine and fingerstick blood specimens collected at three pain management clinics and one suboxone clinic for 35 drugs and/or metabolites. Plasma from the fingerstick blood was used for the analysis. The urine and plasma specimens were analyzed by validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) procedures. The urine cutoff used by most pain testing laboratories were used to identify positive and negative drugs in urine. Limit of quantitation was used to identify positive and negative drugs in plasma. Drugs and/or metabolites were quantified in both urine and plasma using deuterium-labeled internal standards. Results Results were tabulated for urine and plasma specimens for data analysis. The results showed that 8.7% of plasma specimens detected more drugs compared to the corresponding urine specimens, and 2.2% of the urine specimens detected a drug that was negative in the corresponding plasma specimen. Overall 89.1% of the specimens had complete agreement between urine and plasma specimens for detection. The observed Cohen’s Kappa value for overall drug detection was 0.96 an “almost perfect” agreement as characterized by Landis and Koch. Conclusion Based on the observed data, the authors conclude that plasma collected from fingerstick blood is a better matrix to monitor patients currently prescribed pain medications or patients currently undergoing medication-assisted opioid treatment compared to urine drug testing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信