ArticleEJIFCC2025
Abnormal Urine Drug Screens in Pregnancy- Opportunity for Laboratory Stewardship.
Article in EJIFCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Clinical testing for drugs of abuse typically involves initial screening followed by confirmatory testing. Due to limited evidence-based guidelines, the healthcare provider makes the decision to confirm abnormal screens based on the clinical context. This two-step approach proved to be inadequate in scenarios like maternal substance abuse and subsequent fetal/ newborn exposure. The goal of this study is to assess and improve the confirmatory testing rate of abnormal screens among pregnant patients at our women's center. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted to assess the confirmation rates among positively screened pregnant patients, and a lab stewardship initiative was implemented to remind ordering physicians about the importance of confirmatory drug tests. Abnormal screens were classified as expected positives based on the medication-related interference, social history and self-reported substance use from the provider notes. Results: Only 28% of pregnant patients with unexpected positive drug screens underwent confirmatory testing during the pre- intervention period, which rose significantly to 67% during the post-intervention period. Furthermore, outcome analysis revealed that 50% of patients with concordant confirmatory test results were referred to social work and psychiatry in the post-intervention period. Conclusions: This study highlights the value of laboratory stewardship in optimizing drug testing practices for pregnant patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40061067PMC11886620What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.