A Critical Review of Workplace Drug Testing Methods for Old and New Psychoactive Substances: Gaps, Advances, and Perspectives

Overview

Journal Saudi Pharm J

Specialty Pharmacy

Date 2024 Apr 22

PMID 38645754

Authors

Ahmed Ibrahim Al-Asmari

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Workplace drug testing (WDT) is essential to prevent drug abuse disorders among the workforce because it can impair work performance and safety. However, WDT is limited by many challenges, such as urine adulteration, specimen selection, and new psychoactive substances (NPS). This review examined the issues related to WDT. Various scientific databases were searched for articles on WDT for drug detection published between 1986 (when WDT started) and January 2024. The review discussed the history, importance, and challenges of WDT, such as time of specimen collection/testing, specimen adulteration, interference in drug testing, and detection of NPS. It evaluated the best methods to detect NPS in forensic laboratories. Moreover, it compared different techniques that can enhance WDT, such as immunoassays, targeted mass spectrometry, and nontargeted mass spectrometry. These techniques can be used to screen for known and unknown drugs and metabolites in biological samples. This review assessed the strengths and weaknesses of such techniques, such as their validation, identification, library search, and reference standards. Furthermore, this review contrasted the benefits and drawbacks of different specimens for WDT and discussed studies that have applied these techniques for WDT. WDT remains the best approach for preventing drug abuse in the workplace, despite the challenges posed by NPS and limitations of the screening methods. Nontargeted techniques using high-resolution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (MS)/gas chromatography-tandem MS can improve the detection and identification of drugs during WDT and provide useful information regarding the prevalence, trends, and toxicity of both traditional and NPS drugs. Finally, this review suggested that WDT can be improved by using a combination of techniques, multiple specimens, and online library searches in case of new NPS as well as by updating the methods and databases to include new NPS and metabolites as they emerge. To the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first review to address NPS as an issue in WDT and its application and propose the best methods to detect these substances in the workplace environment.

Citing Articles

Substance misuse disorder in Saudi Arabia: A comprehensive examination of current demographic patterns, trends, and intervention requirements.

Tobaiqy M, Al-Asmari A Saudi Pharm J. 2024; 32(10):102163.

PMID: 39262681 PMC: 11387691. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2024.102163.

Special issues in forensic toxicology in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region: The importance of toxicology amid MENA drug challenges.

Al-Asmari A, Alasmari F, Alsanea S Saudi Pharm J. 2024; 32(6):102071.

PMID: 38690208 PMC: 11059284. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsps.2024.102071.

References

Rajsic I, Javorac D, Tatovic S, Repic A, dukic-Cosic D, dordevic S . Effect of urine adulterants on commercial drug abuse screening test strip results. Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 2020; 71(1):87-93. PMC: 7837240. DOI: 10.2478/aiht-2020-71-3315. View

Palamar J, Salomone A, Vincenti M, Cleland C . Detection of "bath salts" and other novel psychoactive substances in hair samples of ecstasy/MDMA/"Molly" users. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2016; 161:200-5. PMC: 4792679. DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.02.001. View

Vikingsson S, Krauss S, Winecker R, Flegel R, Hayes E . Update on Urine Adulterants and Synthetic Urine Samples to Subvert Urine Drug Testing. J Anal Toxicol. 2022; 46(7):697-704. DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkac029. View

Wissenbach D, Steuer A . Advances in testing for sample manipulation in clinical and forensic toxicology - Part A: urine samples. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2023; 415(21):5101-5115. PMC: 10404192. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-023-04711-w. View

Brcak M, Beck O, Bosch T, Carmichael D, Fucci N, George C . European guidelines for workplace drug testing in oral fluid. Drug Test Anal. 2017; 10(3):402-415. DOI: 10.1002/dta.2229. View

Rodriguez-Cruz S . Evaluating the sensitivity, stability, and cross-reactivity of commercial fentanyl immunoassay test strips. J Forensic Sci. 2023; 68(5):1555-1569. DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.15332. View

Ellefsen K, Anizan S, Castaneto M, Desrosiers N, Martin T, Klette K . Validation of the only commercially available immunoassay for synthetic cathinones in urine: Randox Drugs of Abuse V Biochip Array Technology. Drug Test Anal. 2014; 6(7-8):728-38. PMC: 4107059. DOI: 10.1002/dta.1633. View

Mardal M, Andreasen M, Mollerup C, Stockham P, Telving R, Thomaidis N . HighResNPS.com: An Online Crowd-Sourced HR-MS Database for Suspect and Non-targeted Screening of New Psychoactive Substances. J Anal Toxicol. 2019; 43(7):520-527. DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkz030. View

Scheidweiler K, Huestis M . Simultaneous quantification of 20 synthetic cannabinoids and 21 metabolites, and semi-quantification of 12 alkyl hydroxy metabolites in human urine by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2014; 1327:105-17. PMC: 3963402. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2013.12.067. View

10.

Al-Asmari A . Methamphetamine-related postmortem cases in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Forensic Sci Int. 2021; 321:110746. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2021.110746. View

11.

Salomone A, Palamar J, Vincenti M . Should NPS be included in workplace drug testing?. Drug Test Anal. 2019; 12(2):191-194. PMC: 7007821. DOI: 10.1002/dta.2749. View

12.

Hong W, Ko Y, Lin M, Wang P, Chen Y, Chiueh L . Determination of Synthetic Cathinones in Urine Using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry Techniques. J Anal Toxicol. 2015; 40(1):12-6. DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkv108. View

13.

Salomone A, Palamar J . Toxicosurveillance of novel opioids: just screening tests may not be enough. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2021; 47(3):271-272. PMC: 8266745. DOI: 10.1080/00952990.2021.1917588. View

14.

Lung D, Wilson N, Chatenet F, Lacroix C, Gerona R . Non-targeted screening for novel psychoactive substances among agitated emergency department patients. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2016; 54(4):319-23. DOI: 10.3109/15563650.2016.1139714. View

15.

Bush D . The U.S. Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs: current status and future considerations. Forensic Sci Int. 2007; 174(2-3):111-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.03.008. View

16.

Dresen S, Ferreiros N, Gnann H, Zimmermann R, Weinmann W . Detection and identification of 700 drugs by multi-target screening with a 3200 Q TRAP LC-MS/MS system and library searching. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2010; 396(7):2425-34. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-010-3485-2. View

17.

Tsanaclis L, Wicks J, Chasin A . Workplace drug testing, different matrices different objectives. Drug Test Anal. 2012; 4(2):83-8. DOI: 10.1002/dta.399. View

18.

Kim V, Okano C, Osborne C, Frank D, Meana C, Castaneto M . Can synthetic urine replace authentic urine to "beat" workplace drug testing?. Drug Test Anal. 2018; 11(2):331-335. DOI: 10.1002/dta.2497. View

19.

Kyle P, Kaur J . Evaluating Novel Markers for Specimen Validity Testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2019; 144(2):168-171. DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2019-0197-OA. View

20.

Cody J . Specimen Adulteration in Drug Urinalysis. Forensic Sci Rev. 2015; 2(1):63-75. View