We have identified a clinical need for a sensitive, specific, flexible, comprehensive and affordable analytical technology to efficiently detect polydrug use. In addition, the current standard practice of surveilled urine sampling is uncomfortable for the patient; hence, more patient-friendly sample collection methods are requested. To fill these needs, we have developed and validated a high-throughput liquid chromatography–high-resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS) method for the analysis of drugs of abuse (DoA) in oral fluid (OF). The method covers a panel of 71 substances including traditional DoA, prescription narcotics and new psychoactive substances (NPS), with a guaranteed limit of identification of <3 µg/L for 87% of the analytes. Method validation showed high accuracy (>99.7%), sensitivity (>99.7%) and specificity (100%). Most analytes had a high process efficiency during the salting-out liquid–liquid extraction sample preparation and no or only a minor matrix effect during the analysis. We have implemented this method in clinical routine and present data from 18,579 OF samples collected during routine patient treatment in mainly psychiatric and addiction clinics in West Sweden between September 2020 and June 2021. Seventy-one percent of the samples were positive and a total of 41,472 DoA findings were detected. Amphetamine (27%), buprenorphine (25%), nordiazepam (18%) and alprazolam (16%) were most prevalent. New psychoactive substances were detected in 189 samples (1.0%). The occurrence of polydrug use was common; 34% of the positive samples contained three analytes or more and 12% six or more. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first method for comprehensive analysis of DoA in OF using LC-HRMS and the largest dataset published on the detection of DoA in OF. With the current complex and variable drug use pattern, this broad, cost-effective and reliable method has largely replaced immunoassay screening in urine in our laboratory.

New psychoactive substances (NPS) are life threatening through unpredictable toxicity and limited analytical options for clinicians. We present the retrospective identification of NPS in raw data from a liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS)-based multidrug panel analysis on 14 367 clinical oral fluid samples requested during 2019 mainly by psychiatric and addiction care clinics. Retrospectively analysed NPS included 48 notified originally in 2019 by the European Union Early Warning System (EU EWS) and 28 frequently reported in Sweden. Of 88 included NPS, 34 (mitragynine, flualprazolam, 3F/4F-α-P(i)HP, etizolam, 4F-MDMB-BINACA, cyproheptadine, 5F-MDMB-PICA, isotonitazene, isohexedrone, MDPEP, N-ethylpentedrone, tianeptine, flubromazolam, 4 0 -methylhexedrone, α-P(i)HP, eutylone, mephedrone, N-ethylhexedrone, 5F-MDMB-PINACA, ADB-BUTINACA, 3-methoxy PCP, 4F-furanylfentanyl, 4F-isobuturylfentanyl, acrylfentanyl, furanylfentanyl, clonazolam, norfludiazepam, 3F-phenmetrazine, 3-MMC, 4-methylpentedrone, BMDP, ethylphenidate, methylone and α-PVP) were identified as 219 findings in 84 patients. Eight NPS notified in 2019 were identified, five before EWS release. NPS occurred in 1.20% of all samples and 1.53% of samples containing traditional drugs, and in 1.87% of all patients and 2.88% of patients using traditional drugs. NPS use was more common in men and polydrug users. Legal (not scheduled) NPS were more used than comparable illegal ones. Retrospective identification could be useful when prioritizing NPS for clinical routine analysis and when studying NPS epidemiology. K E Y W O R D S drugs of abuse, high resolution mass spectrometry, new psychoactive substances, oral fluid, toxicological analysis | INTRODUCTIONDefinitions of new psychoactive substances (NPS) often cover all narcotic or psychotropic drugs that are not controlled by the United Nations drug conventions but which pose a public health threat comparable to that posed by substances listed in these conventions. 1,2 Although these definitions are wide enough to