Lianping Ti1, Samuel Tobias2, Mark Lysyshyn3, Richard Laing4, Ekaterina Nosova2, JinCheol Choi2, Jaime Arredondo2, Karen McCrae2, Kenneth Tupper5, Evan Wood6. 1. British Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 2A9, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada. Electronic address: lianping.ti@bccsu.ubc.ca. 2. British Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 2A9, Canada. 3. Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, 5(th)Floor, West Esplanade, North Vancouver, BC, V7M 1A2, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. 4. Drug Analysis Service, Health Canada, 3155 Willingdon Green, Burnaby, BC, V5G 4P2, Canada. 5. School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada; School of Child and Youth Care, University of Victoria, 2800 Finnerty Road, Victoria, BC, V8P 5C5, Canada. 6. British Columbia Centre on Substance Use, 400-1045 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC, V6Z 2A9, Canada; Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Point-of-care drug checking services, wherein individuals can check the content and purity of their drugs, have emerged as a public health intervention to address the fentanyl crisis; however, there have been no rigorous evaluations of the technologies against reference standard laboratory techniques. METHODS: Two point-of-care technologies, fentanyl immunoassay strips and Fourier-Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, were implemented at two supervised injection sites in Vancouver, Canada. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and false negative rate for both testing methods as compared to a laboratory reference standard. RESULTS: Between October 2017 and 2018, 331 samples were sent for confirmatory testing. Immunoassay strips had a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 95.2%, with a false negative rate of 12.5%. FTIR spectroscopy had a sensitivity of 72.1% and specificity of 99.0%, with a false negative rate of 27.9%. CONCLUSION: As expected, while FTIR spectroscopy can quantify concentrations on a wide array of compounds, it can only do so above the detection limit. Using FTIR spectroscopy and immunoassay strips in combination has the potential to offset the limitations of each technology when used alone.
OBJECTIVES: Point-of-care drug checking services, wherein individuals can check the content and purity of their drugs, have emerged as a public health intervention to address the fentanyl crisis; however, there have been no rigorous evaluations of the technologies against reference standard laboratory techniques. METHODS: Two point-of-care technologies, fentanyl immunoassay strips and Fourier-Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, were implemented at two supervised injection sites in Vancouver, Canada. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and false negative rate for both testing methods as compared to a laboratory reference standard. RESULTS: Between October 2017 and 2018, 331 samples were sent for confirmatory testing. Immunoassay strips had a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 95.2%, with a false negative rate of 12.5%. FTIR spectroscopy had a sensitivity of 72.1% and specificity of 99.0%, with a false negative rate of 27.9%. CONCLUSION: As expected, while FTIR spectroscopy can quantify concentrations on a wide array of compounds, it can only do so above the detection limit. Using FTIR spectroscopy and immunoassay strips in combination has the potential to offset the limitations of each technology when used alone.
Authors: Joseph Friedman; Philippe Bourgois; Morgan Godvin; Alfonso Chavez; Lilia Pacheco; Luis A Segovia; Leo Beletsky; Jaime Arredondo Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2022-04-11
Authors: Wendy Masterton; Danilo Falzon; Gillian Burton; Hannah Carver; Bruce Wallace; Elizabeth V Aston; Harry Sumnall; Fiona Measham; Rosalind Gittins; Vicki Craik; Joe Schofield; Simon Little; Tessa Parkes Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-22 Impact factor: 4.614