China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Psychosis in Children and Young People
Published in Cathy Laver-Bradbury, Margaret J.J. Thompson, Christopher Gale, Christine M. Hooper, Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 2021
Tony James, Lakshmeesh Muttur Somashekhar
On admission, physical investigations, including drug screening, were negative. Because he was agitated, initially he was treated with low-dose benzodiazepines, which helped him settle. He remained acutely distressed and paranoid, and a low-dose antipsychotic medication was given. He responded well within a week or two. There was no evidence of cognitive decline, and all his psychotic symptoms resolved fairly rapidly. Further enquiry did not indicate any previous psychotic symptoms, except paranoia when smoking cannabis. He was given counselling about the use of illegal drugs and was discharged home and back in college within one to two weeks.
Cost-Effective Screening of Addicted Persons for Significant Illness
Published in Frank Lynn Iber, Alcohol and Drug Abuse as Encountered in Office Practice, 2020
The use of the laboratory for drug screening is presented in Chapter 11. As part of a general health screening, a few tests are obtained. In alcoholics, it is worthwhile to defer blood screening for liver, pancreatic disease, and diabetes for one week. Extensive blood tests are of limited value unless needed to answer a specific question arising from the physical or history. Hemoglobin and white blood counts are of the greatest value and should be obtained promptly. Measurements to detect modest abnormalities in liver function, nutrients, and electrolytes are usually of no therapeutic value, for they will repair themselves whether or not they are identified.
Detection and Identification of Amphetamine and Related Stimulants
Published in John Caldwell, S. Joseph Mulé, Amphetamines and Related Stimulants: Chemical, Biological, Clinical, and Sociological Aspects, 2019
Immunoassay methods measure the drug directly without the requirement of sample extraction. This not only saves time, but also removes a possible source of error through sample loss. The manipulative procedures of immunoassays require less laboratory expertise, and are ideally suited to automation. Thus, these methods are able to handle a very large number of samples routinely. They are well suited to large drug screening situations where a high percentage of negative results are expected, such as those that occur in drug abuse treatment programs. However, immunoassay reagents cross react with a number of compounds which reduce the specificity to such an extent that confirmation by alternative methods is necessary if positive results are to have any significance. Jain et al. have described the mass screening of urine for seven sympathomimetic amines that react positively to the EMIT amphetamine kit by combination of the EMIT system with GLC.22 Urine samples are screened by EMIT, and those that are positive are confirmed by GLC. This multiple approach is recommended to eliminate false positives by immunoassay methods caused by interfering substances in the urine.
The latest advances in high content screening in microfluidic devices
Published in Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery, 2023
Weiyu Liu, Jingyu Wang, Huibo Qi, Qisen Jiao, Lei Wu, Yu Wang, Qionglin Liang
The core concern in high-content drug screening is to study the effects of different kinds or concentrations of drugs. Microarray devices based HCS may be operated conveniently and allow multiplexing, owing to which these platforms are used widely in drug screening. In addition, the platforms could combine the concentration gradient generator with the microarray to achieve rapid high-throughput and content screening. Somaweera et al. reported a diffusion-based gradient generator for drug analysis [97]. In this generator, the laminar flow diffusion of two liquids in the microfluidic pipe facilitated the generation of a concentration gradient, with 256 cell culture chambers on both sides of the gradient generator. The effect of drug concentration on cell apoptosis was evaluated through direct observation under a microscope and fluorescence staining.
Leveraging technology to address unhealthy drug use in primary care: Effectiveness of the Substance use Screening and Intervention Tool (SUSIT)
Published in Substance Abuse, 2022
Jennifer McNeely, Medha Mazumdar, Noa Appleton, Amanda M. Bunting, Antonia Polyn, Steven Floyd, Akarsh Sharma, Donna Shelley, Charles M. Cleland
While the USPSTF drug screening recommendation reflects a recent change, alcohol screening in primary care has been a guideline-recommended practice for over two decades.12 Primary care screening for unhealthy alcohol use followed by brief intervention ranks as the third highest prevention priority for adults in the US, and is one of the most cost-effective preventive services.12–17 Nonetheless, screening and brief intervention is rarely incorporated into routine medical care.18–21 Drug screening and interventions face even greater challenges, given the variety of substances included (ranging from cannabis to heroin and non-medical use of prescribed medications), the illegality of the substances used, and greater knowledge deficits on the part of medical providers.22–26
Construct validity and reproducibility of the Prescription Opioid Misuse And Abuse Questionnaire (POMAQ)
Published in Current Medical Research and Opinion, 2021
Karin S. Coyne, Alexandra I. Barsdorf, Brooke M. Currie, Stephen F. Butler, John T. Farrar, Jean-Yves Mazière, Renee F. Pierson, Harry J. Fisher, Ali A. Bukhari, Sidney H. Schnoll
Drug screening is usually conducted through urine testing because of its low cost, however there is a relatively short window of time to detect drug metabolites in urine, although it is longer than the window for detecting metabolites in the blood. Drug screening through hair testing can capture drug use over a period of 3 or more months38; however, such testing also has limitations. In the current study, patients appeared to report their medication use accurately as corroborated by both hair and urine screens. For some medications, more patients reported using a drug that was not in their urine or hair results (i.e. false-positive rates were higher than false-negative rates). Additionally, given that the duration of time of urine sample collection was on average 22.4 hours from the patients’ last dose of opioid, the results of analyses for urine were truncated to include only patients who had taken an opioid within 12 hours of urine collection. Another likely reason for the higher false-positive rates was the disconnect between the 3-month recall period for medication use of the POMAQ and the point in time when urine and hair samples were collected. Within the 3-month period that patients were asked to recall, they may have been prescribed, or used, multiple medications, which may have been discontinued prior to the time of study enrollment and urine/hair sample collection.