Theresa Kurtz, Elizabeth Charron, Julie Shakib, Marcela C Smid
{"title":"Drug Testing Interpretation in the Peripartum Setting: Results of Clinician Survey.","authors":"Theresa Kurtz, Elizabeth Charron, Julie Shakib, Marcela C Smid","doi":"10.1097/ADM.0000000000001322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objectives of this study were to (1) survey obstetrical and pediatric clinicians' experience, confidence, and training in maternal and neonatal drug testing interpretation; (2) determine their proficiency in drug test interpretation; and (3) assess predictors of correct interpretation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional survey of clinicians caring for pregnant people or newborns at an urban academic center. We assessed clinicians' demographic characteristics, experience, confidence, and prior training in interpretation of maternal and newborn drug tests. We assessed proficiency in interpreting drug tests using 11 clinical vignettes and categorized scores as poor (0-2), fair (3-5), and good (≥6) performance to facilitate data interpretation. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine associations of clinician characteristics and score category (reference category: poor performance).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 103 respondents completed the survey including 60 obstetrical clinicians (58.3%), 19 family medicine physicians (18.5%), 21 pediatric clinicians (20.4%), and 3 social workers (2.9%) (response rate, ~40%). The mean correct response was 4.1 (SD, 2.17; range, 0-11). Most respondent scores were fair (n = 47.6%), followed by good (n = 28.2%) and poor (n = 24.3%). Increased frequency, confidence, and training in interpreting maternal screening and confirmatory tests were associated with higher proficiency. Increased confidence and training in interpreting neonatal screening and confirmatory tests, but not frequency, were associated with higher proficiency.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most clinicians demonstrated fair proficiency in interpreting drug tests. Predictors of proficiency were confidence and prior training for drug test interpretation, suggesting that educational interventions could improve proficiency.</p>","PeriodicalId":14744,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Addiction Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Addiction Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000001322","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: The objectives of this study were to (1) survey obstetrical and pediatric clinicians' experience, confidence, and training in maternal and neonatal drug testing interpretation; (2) determine their proficiency in drug test interpretation; and (3) assess predictors of correct interpretation.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of clinicians caring for pregnant people or newborns at an urban academic center. We assessed clinicians' demographic characteristics, experience, confidence, and prior training in interpretation of maternal and newborn drug tests. We assessed proficiency in interpreting drug tests using 11 clinical vignettes and categorized scores as poor (0-2), fair (3-5), and good (≥6) performance to facilitate data interpretation. We used descriptive statistics to summarize responses. Multinomial logistic regression was used to determine associations of clinician characteristics and score category (reference category: poor performance).
Results: In total, 103 respondents completed the survey including 60 obstetrical clinicians (58.3%), 19 family medicine physicians (18.5%), 21 pediatric clinicians (20.4%), and 3 social workers (2.9%) (response rate, ~40%). The mean correct response was 4.1 (SD, 2.17; range, 0-11). Most respondent scores were fair (n = 47.6%), followed by good (n = 28.2%) and poor (n = 24.3%). Increased frequency, confidence, and training in interpreting maternal screening and confirmatory tests were associated with higher proficiency. Increased confidence and training in interpreting neonatal screening and confirmatory tests, but not frequency, were associated with higher proficiency.
Conclusions: Most clinicians demonstrated fair proficiency in interpreting drug tests. Predictors of proficiency were confidence and prior training for drug test interpretation, suggesting that educational interventions could improve proficiency.
期刊介绍:
The mission of Journal of Addiction Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, is to promote excellence in the practice of addiction medicine and in clinical research as well as to support Addiction Medicine as a mainstream medical sub-specialty.
Under the guidance of an esteemed Editorial Board, peer-reviewed articles published in the Journal focus on developments in addiction medicine as well as on treatment innovations and ethical, economic, forensic, and social topics including:
•addiction and substance use in pregnancy
•adolescent addiction and at-risk use
•the drug-exposed neonate
•pharmacology
•all psychoactive substances relevant to addiction, including alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, marijuana, opioids, stimulants and other prescription and illicit substances
•diagnosis
•neuroimaging techniques
•treatment of special populations
•treatment, early intervention and prevention of alcohol and drug use disorders
•methodological issues in addiction research
•pain and addiction, prescription drug use disorder
•co-occurring addiction, medical and psychiatric disorders
•pathological gambling disorder, sexual and other behavioral addictions
•pathophysiology of addiction
•behavioral and pharmacological treatments
•issues in graduate medical education
•recovery
•health services delivery
•ethical, legal and liability issues in addiction medicine practice
•drug testing
•self- and mutual-help.