scholarly journals Numerous Studies Show Urine Drug Testing A Critical Tool in Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain

2010 ◽  
Vol 5;13 (5;9) ◽  
pp. 503-509
Author(s):  
John W Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Noncancer Pain

Systematic urine drug testing for detecting and managing opioid misuse among chronic noncancer pain patients in primary care—The HARMS Program: A retrospective chart review of 77 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-282
Author(s):  
Niharika Shahi, HBSc ◽  
Ryan Patchett-Marble, BSc, MD, CCFP(AM)
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Chart Review ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Opioid Misuse ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Noncancer Pain

The prevalence of opioid abuse has reached an epidemic level. National guidelines recommend safer opioid prescribing practices, including potentially monitoring patients with urine drug testing (UDT). There is limited research evidence surrounding the use of UDT in the context of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). We evaluated the efficacy of systematic, randomized UDT to detect and manage opioid misuse among patients with CNCP in primary care. The Marathon Family Health Team (MFHT) designed and implemented a clinic-wide, randomized UDT program called the HARMS (High-yield Approach to Risk Mitigation and Safety) Program. This retrospective chart review includes 77 CNCP patients being prescribed opioids, who were initially stratified by their prescriber as “low-risk.” Each month, 10 percent of patients were selected for a random UDT with double testing (immunoassay and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry). The primary outcome measure was UDT leading to a change in management plan. Of the 77 patients in the study, 55 (71 percent) completed at least one UDT during the 12-month study period. Overall, 22 patients had aberrant results. UDT led directly to changes in management in 15 of those patients. Four of those 15 patients were escalated to an addictions program, two were tapered from opioids with informed discussion, and nine were escalated to the high-risk monitoring stream. The results of this study show that in low-risk CNCP patients prescribed opioids, applying systematic UDT in a primary care setting is effective for detecting high risk behaviors and addiction, and altering management. Further research is needed with larger numbers using a prospective study design.

scholarly journals Urine Drug Testing in the Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain in a Kentucky Private Neuroscience Practice: The Potential Effect of Medicare Benefit Changes in Kentucky

2010 ◽  
Vol 2;13 (1;2) ◽  
pp. 187-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Drug Abuse ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Behavioral Health ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Noncancer Pain ◽  
Management Services

Background: Because the symptoms of drug misuse are nonspecific and difficult to detect, pain physicians have relied heavily on the results of urine drug tests to diagnose and treat chronic noncancer pain in patients who are prescribed controlled substances. However, changes in Medicare local carrier determinations for Medicare Part B providers in Connecticut, Indiana, Kentucky, and New York went into effect on July 1, 2009, whereby qualitative drug screening was no longer recognized as medically reasonable and necessary in the treatment of patients with chronic noncancer pain unless the patient presents with suspected drug overdose. Study Design: A retrospective review of urine drug testing services. Objective: To determine the extent of urine drug testing in patients with chronic noncancer pain in a large, Kentucky neuroscience practice offering pain management services combined with neurologic and neurosurgical services to better understand the potential effects of recent changes to Medicare benefits. Methods: An audit of services provided during 2007 was conducted using computer software. Outcome Measures: Outcome measures included the number of practice services, number of urine drug tests by payor, and the number of noncompliant patients by payor who self-released from care. Results: Urine drug tests represented approximately 18.2% of professional medical services rendered in 2007 to patients with a diagnosis of chronic noncancer pain. Of these, UDTs represented approximately 22.2% of services provided to Medicare patients and 24.6% of services provided to Medicaid patients. In 2007, 2,081 patients with noncompliant UDTs self released from the practice against medical advice. Of these, 23.1% were enrolled in Medicare and 47.5% were enrolled in Medicaid. Approximately 40% of patients were referred to the CARE Clinic on the basis of noncompliance as indicated by UDT and/ or behavioral health issues. Of these, approximately 50% remained in treatment. Urine drug tests were also instrumental in revealing that 19.6% of patients showed signs of drug abuse or addiction. Of these patients, approximately 60% were government insured. Limitations: Not a prospective, double-blinded study. We approximated the proportion of patients potentially affected by drug abuse or addiction as the percentage of patients self releasing from medical care. Conclusion: In 2007, UDTs were used as an effective tool in adherence monitoring in a private neuroscience practice in Kentucky that offers pain management services combined with neurologic and neurosurgical services. UDTs were instrumental in referring 40% of patients for evaluation and treatment by behavioral health and addiction medicine specialists. UDTs were also instrumental in discovering signs of drug abuse or addiction in 19.6% of patients. Of these patients, approximately 60% were government insured. Should the objective and reliable sign offered by UDTs be eliminated from the physician’s toolbox, the physician’s ability to accurately diagnose and treat these patients could be impaired. Key words: Chronic noncancer pain, Medicare, Medicaid, urine drug testing, opioids, drug abuse

scholarly journals Importance of Urine Drug Testing in the Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain: Implications of Recent Medicare Policy Changes in Kentucky

2010 ◽  
Vol 2;13 (1;2) ◽  
pp. 167-186
Author(s):  
John W. John W.
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Drug Abuse ◽  
Prescription Drug ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Drug Misuse ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Noncancer Pain

Background: Urine drug testing has become a widely used tool in American society for deterring illicit drug use. In the practice of medicine, urine drug testing is commonly used to help diagnose substance misuse, abuse, or addiction. Objective: This narrative review provides an informed perspective on the importance of urine drug testing in the medical treatment of chronic noncancer pain. The history and current uses of urine drug tests in the United States are reviewed, the prevalence and nature of prescription drug misuse is described as is related to chronic noncancer pain, and implications and considerations for practitioners are presented related to the noncancer pain diagnosis and treatment. Discussion: Practitioners are confronted with the ethical and legal dilemma of being called to adequately treat chronic pain in a culture with a high prevalence of prescription drug abuse. Yet the symptoms of drug abuse are nonspecific and therefore of limited value to the practitioner in determining patient compliance to drug treatment regimens. In contrast, urine drug testing has a reliable history, both in and out of medicine, as an independent sign of drug misuse. This sign can be used to aid in the diagnosis and treatment of drug misuse and underlying addictions to improve patient outcomes. Conclusion: Regular urine drug testing should be a part of acute and chronic pain management whether or not the patient has any signs or symptoms of drug misuse. Key words: chronic noncancer pain, Medicare, Medicaid, urine drug testing, opioids, drug abuse

scholarly journals Interpretation of Urine Drug Testing Results in Patients Using Transdermal Buprenorphine Preparations for the Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain: Table 1

Pain Medicine ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1132-1136 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Markman ◽  
William A. Barbosa ◽  
Jennifer S. Gewandter ◽  
Maria Frazer ◽  
Shirley Rast ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Noncancer Pain

scholarly journals Reducing Opioid Analgesic Deaths in America: What Health Providers Can Do

2015 ◽  
Vol 3;18 (3;5) ◽  
pp. E307-E322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taghogho Agarin
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Drug Testing ◽  
Opioid Analgesic ◽  
Health Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
High Doses

Background: Available data have shown steady increases of drug overdose deaths between 1992 and 2011. We review evidenced-based recommendations provided by a few prominent North American pain societies and suggest ways on how health providers might help reduce opioid analgesic deaths by implementing these practices. Objective: To identify health care providers’ roles in reducing opioid analgesic deaths. Study Design: A comprehensive review of current literature. Methods: The review included relevant literature identified through searches of MEDLINE, Cochran reviews, and Google Scholar, PubMed and EMBASE from January 1998 to January 2014. The level of evidence was classified as I (good), II (fair), and III (limited) based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Results: Several practices such as too high doses overall, giving too high doses to opioid naive patients, too fast opioid titration, insufficient use and knowledge of urine drug testing, not updating knowledge of drug metabolism/interactions, and inadequate patient monitoring are associated with higher risks of opioid analgesic deaths. Suboptimal risk stratification of patients, rotation practices, and use of opioids analgesics in chronic noncancer pain are also associated factors. Limitations: There were a paucity of good evidence studies which show recommendations reduce death. Conclusion: Providers should be aware of all associated factors with opiate analgesic deaths and apply the available evidence in reducing opioid analgesic deaths. Key words: Opioid analgesic deaths, methadone deaths, opioid mortality, opioid guidelines, genetic testing for opioids, urine drug testing

Analytical and technical aspects of testing for drug abuse: confirmatory procedures.

1988 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 471-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
M A Peat
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Analytical Procedure ◽  
Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Technical Aspects ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Accuracy And Precision ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Chemical Technique ◽  
Layer Chromatography

Abstract Many laboratories are now performing urine drug testing for employers, governmental agencies, and other institutions. It is now recognized that presumptive positive screening results have to be confirmed by an analytical procedure based on a different chemical technique with greater than or equal sensitivity to the screening test. Thin-layer chromatography has been widely used for this; however, it is relatively insensitive for certain drugs, and it cannot satisfy the accuracy and precision requirements needed to determine threshold concentrations reliably. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry is able to satisfy these threshold requirements and has become the method of choice for confirming initial immunoassay results.

Use of LC-HRMS in full scan-XIC mode for multi-analyte urine drug testing - a step towards a ‘black-box’ solution?

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (8) ◽  
pp. 497-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. N. Stephanson ◽  
P. Signell ◽  
A. Helander ◽  
O. Beck
Keyword(s):  
Drug Testing ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Urine Drug Testing ◽  
Urine Drug ◽  
Full Scan
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document