Urine drug screening: A guide to monitoring Tx with controlled substances

,; ,

doi:10.12788/jfp.0168

Applied Evidence

Urine drug screening: A guide to monitoring Tx with controlled substances

J Fam Pract. 2021 April;70(3):112-120 | 10.12788/jfp.0168

PDF Download

References

1. TAP 32: Clinical drug testing in primary care. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health & Human Services; 2012. Technical Assistance Publication (TAP) 32; HHS Publication No. (SMA) 12-4668. 2012. Accessed March 19, 2021. https://store.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/d7/priv/sma12-4668.pdf

2. Gaither JR, Gordon K, Crystal S, et al. Racial disparities in discontinuation of long-term opioid therapy following illicit drug use among black and white patients. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;192:371-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.05.033

3. Segal, David. In pursuit of liquid gold. The New York Times. December 27, 2017. Accessed March 19, 2021. https://nyti.ms/2E2GTOU

4. Ceasar R, Chang J, Zamora K, et al. Primary care providers’ experiences with urine toxicology tests to manage prescription opioid misuse and substance use among chronic noncancer pain patients in safety net health care settings. Subst Abus. 2016;37:154-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/08897077.2015.1132293

5. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain — United States, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65:1-49. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr6501e1

6. Katz NP, Sherburne S, Beach M, et al. Behavioral monitoring and urine toxicology testing in patients receiving long-term opioid therapy. Anesth Analg. 2003;97:1097-1102. https://doi.org/ 10.1213/01.ane.0000080159.83342.b5

7. Wilcox CE, Bogenschutz MP, Nakazawa M, et al. Concordance between self-report and urine drug screen data in adolescent opioid dependent clinical trial participants. Addict Behav. 2013;38:2568-2574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.05.015

8. Zanis DA, McLellan AT, Randall M. Can you trust patient self-reports of drug use during treatment? Drug Alcohol Depend. 1994;35:127-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-8716(94)90119-8

9. Jones CM, Paulozzi LJ, Mack KA. Sources of prescription opioid pain relievers by frequency of past-year nonmedical use: United States, 2008-2011. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:802-803. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.12809

10. Katz N, Fanciullo GJ. Role of urine toxicology testing in the management of chronic opioid therapy. Clin J Pain. 2002;18(4 suppl):S76-S82. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002508-200207001-00009

11. Vowles KE, McEntee ML, Julnes PS, et al. Rates of opioid misuse, abuse, and addiction in chronic pain: a systematic review and data synthesis. Pain. 2015;156:569-576. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460357.01998.f1

12. Warner EA, Walker RM, Friedmann PD. Should informed consent be required for laboratory testing for drugs of abuse in medical settings? Am J Med. 2003;115:54-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00236-5

13. Kelly JF, Wakeman SE, Saitz R. Stop talking ‘dirty’: clinicians, language, and quality of care for the leading cause of preventable death in the United States. Am J Med. 2015;128:8-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.07.043

14. Jarvis M, Williams J, Hurford M, et al. Appropriate use of drug testing in clinical addiction medicine. J Addict Med. 2017;11:163-173. https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000323

15. Argoff CE, Alford DP, Fudin J, et al. Rational urine drug monitoring in patients receiving opioids for chronic pain: consensus recommendations. Pain Med. 2018;19:97-117. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnx285

16 Ainscough TS, McNeill A, Strang J, et al. Contingency management interventions for non-prescribed drug use during treatment for opiate addiction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;178:318-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2017.05.028

17. Blum K, Han D, Femino J, et al. Systematic evaluation of “compliance” to prescribed treatment medications and “abstinence” from psychoactive drug abuse in chemical dependence programs: data from the comprehensive analysis of reported drugs. PLoS One. 2014;9:e104275. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104275

18. Miller SC, Fiellin DA, Rosenthal RN, et al. The ASAM Principles of Addiction Medicine. 6th ed. Wolters Kluwer; 2018.

19. Saitman A, Park H-D, Fitzgerald RL. False-positive interferences of common urine drug screen immunoassays: a review. J Anal Toxicol. 2014;38:387-396. https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bku075

20. Smith MP, Bluth MH. Common interferences in drug testing. Clin Lab Med. 2016;36:663-671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2016.07.006

21. George S, Braithwaite RA. An investigation into the extent of possible dilution of specimens received for urinary drugs of abuse screening. Addiction. 1995;90:967-970. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.1995.9079679.x

22. Beck O, Bohlin M, Bragd F, et al. Adulteration of urine drug testing—an exaggerated cause of concern. [Article in Swedish] Lakartidningen. 2000;97:703-706.

23. Kale N. Urine drug tests: ordering and interpreting results. Am Fam Physician. 2019;99:33-39.

24. Dasgupta A. The effects of adulterants and selected ingested compounds on drugs-of-abuse testing in urine. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;128:491-503. https://doi.org/10.1309/FQY06F8XKTQPM149

25. Definition of addiction. American Society of Addiction Medicine Web site. Updated October 21, 2019. Accessed February 20, 2021. https://www.asam.org/resources/definition-of-addiction

26. Kroenke K, Alford DP, Argoff C, et al. Challenges with Implementing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Opioid Guideline: A Consensus Panel Report. Pain Med. 2019;20:724-735. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pny307

How is the appropriate tests elected for urine drug screening?

Variables that influence your choice of the proper test method include the clinical question at hand; cost; the urgency of obtaining results; and the stakes in that decision (ie, will the results be used to simply change the dosage of a medication or, of greater consequence, to determine fitness for employment or inform criminal justice decisions?). Each method of UDS has advantages that can be utilized and disadvantages that must be considered to obtain an accurate and useful result.

Immunoassay provides rapid results, is relatively easy to perform, and is, comparatively, inexpensive.^1,14 The speed of results makes this method particularly useful in settings such as the emergency department, where rapid results are crucial. Ease of use makes immunoassay ideal for the office, where non-laboratory staff can be trained to properly administer the test.

A major disadvantage of immunoassay technology, however, is interference resulting in both false-positive and false-negative results, which is discussed in detail in the next section. Immunoassay should be considered a screening test that yields presumptive results.

Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry is exquisitely specific and provides confirmatory test results—major advantages of the method. However, specificity comes at a price: significantly increased cost and longer wait time for results (typically days, if specimens are sent out to a laboratory). These barriers can make it impractical to employ this method in routine practice.

Interpretation of results: Not so fast

Interpreting UDS results is not as simple as noting a positive or negative result. Physicians must understand the concept of interference, so that results can be appropriately interpreted and confirmed. This is crucial when results influence clinical decisions; inappropriate action, taken on the basis of presumptive results, can have severe consequences for the patient–provider relationship and the treatment plan.^1,14

Continue to: Interference falls into 2 categories...