Use of a visual panel detection method for drugs of abuse: Clinical and laboratory experience with children and adolescents

• Published in: The Journal of pediatrics Vol. 126; no. 1; pp. 135 - 140
• Main Authors: Valentine, Jimmie L., Komoroski, Eva M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, NY Mosby, Inc 1995; Elsevier
• Subjects: Adolescent; Age Factors; Amphetamines; Barbiturates; Benzodiazepines; Biological and medical sciences; Cannabinoids; Child; Child Behavior; Child, Preschool; Chromatography, Gas; Cross Reactions; Diagnosis, Differential; Drug addictions; Humans; Mass Spectrometry; Medical sciences; Narcotics; Predictive Value of Tests; Substance Abuse Detection - methods; Substance-Related Disorders - urine; Toxicology; GC-MS; 9-carboxy-THC; Human; Clinical test; Urine; Drug addiction; Biochemical analysis; Visual observation; Test validation; Accident; Adolescent; Poisoning; Drug of abuse; Diagnosis; Child
• ISSN: 0022-3476; 1097-6833
• DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3476(95)70517-1

We evaluated the Triage panel for drugs of abuse, a visual method that simultaneously detects seven distinct drug classes in a single aliquot of urine, by use of 1214 urine specimens obtained from children and adolescent patients whose clinical findings warranted a toxicology evaluation. A total of 295 positive results were confirmed by gas chromatography- mass spectrometry. Additional toxicology investigations were not performed on specimens with negative results unless the clinical findings did not correspond with the urine Triage results. The positive predictive value of the test was found to be > 85% for detection of barbiturates, cannabinoid metabolite, cocaine metabolite, and opiates; for the benzodiazepines the positive predictive value was 77%. Positive predictive values were 53% for amphetamines and 40% for phencyclidine, although only five specimens were available for evaluation of the latter drug. Correlation between clinical findings of patients and results from the Triage test were good except for ingestion of sympathomimetic amines (because of selectivity of the antibodies used in the test for amphetamines) and in patients receiving either antianxiety or antidepressant drugs (some membhers of these classes of drugs or their metabolites appeared to cross-react with the benzodiazepine test). The primary advantages of the Triage test were the rapid turnaround time, the ease with which a specimen could be processed, and the ability to use rapidly provided information as part of a differential diagnosis. (J P EDIATR 1995;126:135-40)