OBJECTIVES: Twenty to forty percent of all patients admitted to the emergency ward are positive for blood alcohol. Devices which measure alcohol in expired breath have been increasingly used in these units. This study was conducted to compare the results of breath alcohol analyzers with the classical laboratory methods based on enzyme assay and gas phase chromatography. METHODS: All patients with suspected acute ethanol intoxication at admission to the emergency room were included if blood alcohol had been ordered (enzyme assay and gas phase chromatography). RESULTS: There were 204 patients (151 men (74%) and 53 women (26%); mean age 43 +/- 12.7 years, range 14-80). The coefficient of correlation between blood alcohol level determined by gas phase chromatography (GC) and breath alcohol was 0.96 (r2 = 0.92, p < 10(-4)). The coefficient of correlation between breath alcohol and blood alcohol level determined by enzyme assay was 0.96 (r2 = 0.92, p < 10(-4)). Comparing the coefficients of correlation GC/blood (r2 = 0.92) versus GC/enzyme assay (r2 = 0.96) demonstrated a statistically significant difference (p < 10(-3)). CONCLUSION: In our 204 patients, the breath alcohol analyzer gave 3 false positives and 3 false negatives (2.94%). Even though breath alcohol levels are 21.1% lower than the levels given by gas phase chromatography, it is an instantaneous nonaggressive method well correlated with classical blood tests. Nevertheless, this method could not be used in 19.6% of emergency patients due to physical impossibility or refusal, justifying laboratory tests.
OBJECTIVES: Twenty to forty percent of all patients admitted to the emergency ward are positive for blood alcohol. Devices which measure alcohol in expired breath have been increasingly used in these units. This study was conducted to compare the results of breath alcohol analyzers with the classical laboratory methods based on enzyme assay and gas phase chromatography. METHODS: All patients with suspected acute ethanol intoxication at admission to the emergency room were included if blood alcohol had been ordered (enzyme assay and gas phase chromatography). RESULTS: There were 204 patients (151 men (74%) and 53 women (26%); mean age 43 +/- 12.7 years, range 14-80). The coefficient of correlation between blood alcohol level determined by gas phase chromatography (GC) and breath alcohol was 0.96 (r2 = 0.92, p < 10(-4)). The coefficient of correlation between breath alcohol and blood alcohol level determined by enzyme assay was 0.96 (r2 = 0.92, p < 10(-4)). Comparing the coefficients of correlation GC/blood (r2 = 0.92) versus GC/enzyme assay (r2 = 0.96) demonstrated a statistically significant difference (p < 10(-3)). CONCLUSION: In our 204 patients, the breath alcohol analyzer gave 3 false positives and 3 false negatives (2.94%). Even though breath alcohol levels are 21.1% lower than the levels given by gas phase chromatography, it is an instantaneous nonaggressive method well correlated with classical blood tests. Nevertheless, this method could not be used in 19.6% of emergency patients due to physical impossibility or refusal, justifying laboratory tests.