Methods to reduce false reporting of substance abstinence in clinical research

Identifying an accurate self-reported screening tool for alcohol use disorder: evidence from a Swiss, male population-based assessment

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Short screenings for alcohol use disorder (AUD) are crucial for public health purposes, but current self-reported measures have several pitfalls and may be unreliable. The main aim of our study was to provide empirical evidence on the psychometric performance of self-reports currently used. Our research questions were: compared with a gold standard clinical interview, how accurate are (1) self-reported AUD, (2) self-reported alcohol use over time and (3) biomarkers of alcohol use among Swiss men? Finally, we aimed to identify an alternative screening tool.

DESIGN

A single-center study with a cross-sectional design and a stratified sample selection.

SETTING

Lausanne University Hospital (Switzerland) from October 2017 to June 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

We selected participants from the French-speaking participants of the ongoing Cohort Study on Substance Use and Risk Factors (n = 233). The sample included young men aged on average 27.0 years.

MEASUREMENTS

We used the Diagnostic Interview for Genetic Studies as the gold standard for DSM-5 AUD. The self-reported measures included 11 criteria for AUD, nine alcohol-related consequences, and previous 12 months' alcohol use. We also assessed biomarkers of chronic excessive drinking (ethyl glucuronide and phosphatidylethanol).

FINDINGS

None of the self-reported measures/biomarkers taken alone displayed both sensitivity and specificity close to 100% with respect to the gold standard (e.g. self-reported AUD: sensitivity = 92.3%, specificity = 45.8%). The best model combined eight self-reported criteria of AUD and four alcohol-related consequences. Using a cut-off of three, this screening tool yielded acceptable sensitivity (83.3%) and specificity (78.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither self-reported alcohol use disorder nor heavy alcohol use appear to be adequate to screen for alcohol use disorder among young men from the Swiss population. The best screening alternative for alcohol use disorder among young Swiss men appears to be a combination of eight symptoms of alcohol use disorder and four alcohol-related consequences.

Opioid and cocaine use among primary care patients on buprenorphine-Self-report and urine drug tests

BACKGROUND

Urine drug tests (UDTs) are recommended to monitor patients treated for opioid use disorder in primary care. The aims are to (1) estimate the frequency of self-report and UDT results of opioid and cocaine use and (2) evaluate the association between treatment time with non-disclosure of opioid or cocaine use and having a positive UDT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients enrolled in a primary care-based buprenorphine program between January 2011-April 2013. We describe three clinical visits types: no disclosure of opioid/cocaine use and positive UDT; disclosure of opioid or cocaine use and a negative or positive UDT; and no disclosure of opioid or cocaine use and a negative UDT. We fit generalized estimating equations logistic regression models to evaluate whether treatment time is associated with non-disclosure of opioids or cocaine use and a positive UDT.

RESULTS

Among all UDT results (n = 1755) from 130 patients, 10% were positive for illicit opioids and 4% for cocaine. Among UDTs with illicit opioid or cocaine positive results, in 57% and 76% of these scenarios, the patient did not disclose. The odds of non-disclosure and having a positive UDT was higher in the first 180 days for opioids and 90 days for cocaine.

CONCLUSION

Among primary care patients treated with buprenorphine, a small but substantial percentage of UDTs were cocaine or opioid positive. As treatment time increased, non-disclosure was less common but persisted even after six months. Among primary care patients treated with buprenorphine, UDTs contribute information to optimize clinical care.

Methods to reduce false reporting of substance abstinence in clinical research

OBJECTIVES

Substance use may influence study results in human subjects research. This study aims to report the concordance between self-report and biochemical assessments of substance use and test the effect of methods to reduce false reports of abstinence in trauma-exposed women participating in a research study.

METHODS

In this pilot study, substance use was assessed during telephone prescreening and via self-report and biochemical verification (i.e., urine toxicology and alcohol breathalyzer tests) at an in-person evaluation. Due to the high number of participants who tested positive for substances despite self-reporting abstinence during prescreening, study procedures were modified to disincentivize false self-reports of substance use two thirds of the way through recruitment. New potential participants were explicitly informed during prescreening and informed consent that a positive drug or alcohol test during screening would result in exclusion from the study and withholding of payment.

RESULTS

Prior to modifying study methods, 20% of participants who had reported abstinence during the telephone prescreen had a positive substance use test at the in-person visit. Modifying study procedures resulted in an 81% decrease in positive substance use assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of this methodology may decrease inadvertent confounding of clinical research outcomes by undetected and/or misreported substance use.