Urinalysis for detection of drug abuse is widely used in pre-employment screening and correctional administration. Substantial protocols have been developed in these applications of drug testing to minimize the impact of any given vendor on results. Much less documentation exists for epidemiological drug testing programs such as the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program. This paper explores the impact that changes in laboratory vendors and data collection methods have on drug testing results. Here, we report the findings from a comparison study. The project was designed to determine the consistency of the urinalysis results when the same urine specimens were analyzed by two independent laboratories.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ADAM Annual Report, (Formerly Drug Use Forecasting program), National Institute of Justice, Department of Justice, 1987–1998.
2.
ArmbrusterD.A.SchwarzhoffR.H.HubsterE.C.LiserioM.K.1993Enzyme immunoassay, kinetic microparticle immunoassay, radioimmunoassay, and fluorescence polarization immunoassay compared for drugs-of-abuse screening. Clinical Chemistry39(10):2137–46.
3.
DextrazeP.GriffithsW.C.CamaraP.AudetteL.RosnerM.1989Comparison of fluorescence polarization immunoassay, enzyme immunoassay, and thin-layer chromatography for urine cannabinoid screening: Effects of analyte adsorption and vigorous mixing of specimen on detectability. Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science19(2): 133–8.
4.
FentonJ.SchafferM.ChenN.W.BermesE. W.Jr.1980A comparison of enzyme immunoassay and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry in forensic toxicology. Journal of Forensic Science25(2):314–9.
5.
FleissJ.L.1981Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
6.
LandisJ.R.KochG.G.1977The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33:159–174.
7.
FrederickD.L.GreenJ.FowlerM.W.1985Comparison of six cannabinoid metabolite assays. Journal of Analytical Toxicology9(3): 116–20.
8.
JonesD.W.AdamsD.MartelP.A.RousseauR.J.1985Drug population in one thousand geographically distributed urine specimens. Journal of Analytical Toxicology9(3): 125–30.
9.
LuN.T.MeekerJ.E.RileyK.J.1999Reliability of opiates EMIT screening kit: Detecting heroin abuse, over-the-counter drugs or both? In preparation.
10.
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. National Institute on Drug Abuse. 1988, Federal RegisterVol. 53, No 69, 11970.
11.
PaulB.D.McKinleyR.M.WalshJ.K.Jr.JamirT.S.PastM.R.1993Effect of freezing on the concentration of drugs of abuse in urine. Journal of Analytical Toxicology17:378.
12.
RombergR.W.PastM.R.1994Reanalysis of forensic urine specimens containing benzoylecgonine and THC-COOH. Journal of Forensic Science39:479.
13.
RubensteinK.E.SchneiderR.S.UllmanE.F.1972Homogeneous enzyme immunoassay: A new immunochemical technique. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications47:846.
14.
VerebeyK.MuleS.J.AlraziJ.LehrerM.1986One hundred EMIT positive cannabinoid urine samples confirmed by BPA/TLC, RIA, and GC/MS. Journal of Analytical Toxicology10(2):79–80.
15.
VoglW.F.BushD.M.1997Medical review officer manual for federal workplace drug testing programs. Department of Health & Human Services. Publication No. (SMA) 97-3164.
16.
WeaverM.L.GanB.K.AllenE.BaughL.D.LiaoF.Y.LiuR.H.LangnerJ.G.WaliaA.S.CookL.F.1991Correlations on radioimmunoassay, fluorescence polarization immunoassay, and enzyme immunoassay of cannabis metabolites with gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis of 11-nor-delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid in urine specimens. Forensic Science International49(1):43–56.
17.
WillsonN.J.KoganM.J.PiersonD.J.NewmanE.1983Confirmation of EMIT cannabinoid assay results by bonded phase adsorption with thin layer chromatography. Journal of Toxicology and Clinical Toxicology20(5):465–73.
