BACKGROUND: Urine drug testing (UDT) is an essential tool to monitor opioid misuse among patients on chronic opioid therapy. Inaccurate interpretation of UDT can have deleterious consequences. Providers' ability to accurately interpret and document UDT, particularly definitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/ MS) results, has not been widely studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether providers correctly interpret, document, and communicate LC-MS/MS UDT results. DESIGN: This is a retrospective chart review of 160 UDT results (80 aberrant; 80 non-aberrant) between August 2017 and February 2018 from 5 ambulatory clinics (3 primary care, 1 oncology, 1 pain management). Aberrant results were classified into one or more of the following categories: illicit drug use, simulated compliance, not taking prescribed medication, and taking a medication not prescribed. Accurate result interpretation was defined as concordance between the provider's documented interpretation and an expert laboratory toxicologist's interpretation. Outcome measures were concordance between provider and laboratory interpretation of UDT results, documentation of UDT results, results acknowledgement in the electronic health record, communication of results to the patient, and rate of prescription refills. KEY RESULTS: Aberrant results were most frequently due to illicit drug use. Overall, only 88 of the 160 (55%) had any documented provider interpretations of which 25/88 (28%) were discordant with the laboratory toxicologist's interpretation. Thirty-six of the 160 (23%) documented communication of the results to the patient. Communicating results was more likely to be documented if the results were aberrant compared with non-aberrant (33/80 [41%] vs. 3/80 [4%], p < 0.001). In all cases where provider interpretations were discordant with the laboratory interpretation, prescriptions were refilled. CONCLUSIONS: Erroneous provider interpretation of UDT results, infrequent documentation of interpretation, lack of communication of results to patients, and prescription refills despite inaccurate interpretations are common. Expert assistance with urine toxicology interpretations may be needed to improve provider accuracy when interpreting toxicology results.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Fentanyl is commonly given as an analgesic during labor and delivery. The extent of transplacental drug transfer and fetal exposure is not well studied. We analyzed the relationship between neonatal urine fentanyl results and various peripartum factors. Methods A total of 96 neonates with urine toxicology screening between January 2017 and September 2018 were included in the study. Medical record review was used to obtain maternal, neonatal, and anesthesia parameters. A subset of 9 specimens were further tested for levels of fentanyl and norfentanyl by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Results In 29% (n = 24) of cases associated with fentanyl-containing labor analgesia, neonatal toxicology screens were positive for the presence of fentanyl. Positive test results strongly correlated with the cumulative dose and duration of labor analgesia (P &lt; 0.001). The odds of positive neonatal fentanyl screen results increased 4-fold for every 5 hours of maternal exposure to labor analgesia. Importantly, however, neonatal outcomes for infants with positive and negative urine fentanyl screens were the same. Conclusions Our study establishes that maternal fentanyl analgesia is strongly associated with positive neonatal urine fentanyl screens and suggests that more judicious use of these laboratory tests may be warranted.