• Cheng-ting Lee, Trang T Vo, Abigail S Cohen, Shihab Ahmed, Yi Zhang, Jianren Mao, and Lucy Chen.
• *University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, USA.
• Pain Med. 2016 Apr 1; 17 (4): 636-43.

ObjectiveTo examine similarities and differences in urine drug test (UDT) results in clinical pain patients and pain subjects participating in pain research studies.DesignAn observational study with retrospective chart review and data analysis.MethodsWe analyzed 1,874 UDT results obtained from 1) clinical pain patients (Clinical Group; n = 1,529) and 2) pain subjects consented to participate in pain research studies (Research Group; n = 345). Since several medications such as opioids used in pain management are drugs of abuse (DOA) and can result in a positive UDT, we specifically identified those cases of positive UDT due to nonprescribed DOA and designated these cases as positive UDT with DOA (PUD).ResultsWe found that 1) there was a higher rate of PUD in clinical pain patients (41.3%) than in pain research study subjects (14.8%); 2) although subjects in the Research Group were informed ahead of time that UDT will be conducted as a screening test, a substantial number (14.8%) of pain research study subjects still showed PUD; 3) there were different types of DOA between clinical pain patients (cannabinoids as the top DOA) and research study subjects (cocaine as the top DOA); and 4) a common factor associated with PUD was opioid therapy in both Clinical Group and Research Group.ConclusionThese results support previous findings that PUD is a common finding in clinical pain patients, particularly in those prescribed opioid therapy, and we suggest that UDT be used as routine screening testing in pain research studies.© 2015 American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

26 keywords...

hide…