Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence

Ashok Mallya; Amanda L. Purnell; Dragan M. Svrakic; Ann M. Lovell; Kenneth E. Freedland; Britt M. Gott; Gregory S. Sayuk; Theodore J. Cicero; Peter A. Brawer; Jodie A. Trafton; Jeffrey F. Scherrer; Patrick J. Lustman

doi:10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x

Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence

Ashok Mallya, Amanda L. Purnell, Dragan M. Svrakic, Ann M. Lovell, Kenneth E. Freedland, Britt M. Gott, Gregory S. Sayuk, Theodore J. Cicero, Peter A. Brawer, Jodie A. Trafton, Jeffrey F. Scherrer, Patrick J. Lustman

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background and Objectives Clinics licensed to provide pharmacotherapy for opiate dependence disorder are required to perform random urine drug screen (RUDS) tests. The results provide the empirical basis of individual treatment and programmatic effectiveness, and public health policy. Patients consent to witnessed testing but most tests are unwitnessed. The purpose of the present study was to compare treatment effectiveness estimates derived from witnessed versus unwitnessed urine samples. Methods We adopted a policy requiring visually witnessed urine drug screens (WUDS) and studied its impact (a single group, pretest-posttest design) on the RUDS test results in 115 male veterans enrolled in the St. Louis VA Opioid Treatment Program. Results The percentage of opioid-positive urine samples increased significantly following implementation of WUDS (25% vs. 41%, χ² = 66.5, p <.001). Conclusions and Scientific Significance Results of this preliminary study suggest that random testing alone does not ensure the integrity of UDS testing. Outcome calculations based on random unwitnessed tests may overestimate the effectiveness of opioid dependence disorder treatment. (Am J Addict 2013;22:175-177)

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	175-177
Number of pages	3
Journal	American Journal on Addictions
Volume	22
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x
State	Published - Mar 2013

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x

Cite this

Mallya, A., Purnell, A. L., Svrakic, D. M., Lovell, A. M., Freedland, K. E., Gott, B. M., Sayuk, G. S., Cicero, T. J., Brawer, P. A., Trafton, J. A., Scherrer, J. F., & Lustman, P. J. (2013). Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence. American Journal on Addictions, 22(2), 175-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x

@article{cee3ae17e6144e4dae7f606082b8a17f,

title = "Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence",

abstract = "Background and Objectives Clinics licensed to provide pharmacotherapy for opiate dependence disorder are required to perform random urine drug screen (RUDS) tests. The results provide the empirical basis of individual treatment and programmatic effectiveness, and public health policy. Patients consent to witnessed testing but most tests are unwitnessed. The purpose of the present study was to compare treatment effectiveness estimates derived from witnessed versus unwitnessed urine samples. Methods We adopted a policy requiring visually witnessed urine drug screens (WUDS) and studied its impact (a single group, pretest-posttest design) on the RUDS test results in 115 male veterans enrolled in the St. Louis VA Opioid Treatment Program. Results The percentage of opioid-positive urine samples increased significantly following implementation of WUDS (25% vs. 41%, χ2 = 66.5, p <.001). Conclusions and Scientific Significance Results of this preliminary study suggest that random testing alone does not ensure the integrity of UDS testing. Outcome calculations based on random unwitnessed tests may overestimate the effectiveness of opioid dependence disorder treatment. (Am J Addict 2013;22:175-177)",

author = "Ashok Mallya and Purnell, {Amanda L.} and Svrakic, {Dragan M.} and Lovell, {Ann M.} and Freedland, {Kenneth E.} and Gott, {Britt M.} and Sayuk, {Gregory S.} and Cicero, {Theodore J.} and Brawer, {Peter A.} and Trafton, {Jodie A.} and Scherrer, {Jeffrey F.} and Lustman, {Patrick J.}",

year = "2013",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x",

language = "English",

volume = "22",

pages = "175--177",

journal = "American Journal on Addictions",

issn = "1055-0496",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence

AU - Mallya, Ashok

AU - Purnell, Amanda L.

AU - Svrakic, Dragan M.

AU - Lovell, Ann M.

AU - Freedland, Kenneth E.

AU - Gott, Britt M.

AU - Sayuk, Gregory S.

AU - Cicero, Theodore J.

AU - Brawer, Peter A.

AU - Trafton, Jodie A.

AU - Scherrer, Jeffrey F.

AU - Lustman, Patrick J.

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - Background and Objectives Clinics licensed to provide pharmacotherapy for opiate dependence disorder are required to perform random urine drug screen (RUDS) tests. The results provide the empirical basis of individual treatment and programmatic effectiveness, and public health policy. Patients consent to witnessed testing but most tests are unwitnessed. The purpose of the present study was to compare treatment effectiveness estimates derived from witnessed versus unwitnessed urine samples. Methods We adopted a policy requiring visually witnessed urine drug screens (WUDS) and studied its impact (a single group, pretest-posttest design) on the RUDS test results in 115 male veterans enrolled in the St. Louis VA Opioid Treatment Program. Results The percentage of opioid-positive urine samples increased significantly following implementation of WUDS (25% vs. 41%, χ2 = 66.5, p <.001). Conclusions and Scientific Significance Results of this preliminary study suggest that random testing alone does not ensure the integrity of UDS testing. Outcome calculations based on random unwitnessed tests may overestimate the effectiveness of opioid dependence disorder treatment. (Am J Addict 2013;22:175-177)

AB - Background and Objectives Clinics licensed to provide pharmacotherapy for opiate dependence disorder are required to perform random urine drug screen (RUDS) tests. The results provide the empirical basis of individual treatment and programmatic effectiveness, and public health policy. Patients consent to witnessed testing but most tests are unwitnessed. The purpose of the present study was to compare treatment effectiveness estimates derived from witnessed versus unwitnessed urine samples. Methods We adopted a policy requiring visually witnessed urine drug screens (WUDS) and studied its impact (a single group, pretest-posttest design) on the RUDS test results in 115 male veterans enrolled in the St. Louis VA Opioid Treatment Program. Results The percentage of opioid-positive urine samples increased significantly following implementation of WUDS (25% vs. 41%, χ2 = 66.5, p <.001). Conclusions and Scientific Significance Results of this preliminary study suggest that random testing alone does not ensure the integrity of UDS testing. Outcome calculations based on random unwitnessed tests may overestimate the effectiveness of opioid dependence disorder treatment. (Am J Addict 2013;22:175-177)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874076687&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.00326.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 23414505

AN - SCOPUS:84874076687

SN - 1055-0496

VL - 22

SP - 175

EP - 177

JO - American Journal on Addictions

JF - American Journal on Addictions

IS - 2

ER -

Witnessed versus Unwitnessed Random Urine Tests in the Treatment of Opioid Dependence

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this