| |
Published:
Journal of Analytical Toxicology,
ISSN 0146-4760,
Volume 26, Number 7, October 2002,
pp. 464-471
Performance Evaluation of Three On-Site Adulterant Detection
Devices for Urine Specimens
Michelle R. Peace[1] and Lisa D. Tarnai[2]
[1]Medical College of Virginia Campus at Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond,
Virginia 23298-0165
[2]Scientific Testing Laboratories, Inc., Richmond, Virginia 23236
The performance of three on-site
adulterant detection devices that assess the integrity of urine specimens collected
for drug-of-abuse testing was evaluated: the Intect™ 7, MASK Ultra Screen®,
and Adultacheck™ 4. Intect 7 simultaneously tests creatinine, nitrite,
glutaraldehyde, pH, specific gravity, and the presence of bleach and pyridinium
chlorochromate (PCC). Mask Ultra Screen tests creatinine, nitrite, pH, specific
gravity, and oxidants, and Adultacheck 4 tests creatinine, nitrite, glutaraldehyde,
and pH. Urine specimens were prepared with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Administration regulated analytes at 50% above the cut-off concentrations. Stealth™,
Urine Luck™, Instant Clean ADD-IT-ive™, and KLEAR were added individually
to the drug-added urine specimens so that their concentrations reflected the
“optimum” usage reported in their package inserts and 25% above
and below that optimum. Stealth is reported to be peroxidase; Urine Luck is
believed to be PCC; Instant Clean ADD-it-ive reportedly contains glutaraldehyde,
and Klear is a nitrite. The following diluents/adulterants were added at 25%,
33%, and 50% of the volume of drug-added urine: distilled water, bleach, ammonia,
and vinegar. Of the devices tested, Intect 7 proved to be the most sensitive,
and it correctly indicated the presence of adulterant or diluent in all samples
tested. In order to do so, all indication pads had to be assessed in concert.
Adultacheck 4 specifically assesses four characteristics of urine integrity
and is therefore very limited in detecting the use of several popular adulterants
that are commercially available. Although it correctly assessed the four characteristics,
it did not detect the use of Stealth, Urine Luck, or Instant Clean ADD-it-ive.
Mask Ultra Screen can potentially detect a broader range of adulterants than
Adultacheck 4. However, in practice, it only detected them at levels well above
their optimum usage, making it less efficacious than Intect 7. Clearly, the
specific identification of an adulterant is a trade-off for sensitive detection
of several adulterants. Reproduction
of editorial content of this journal is prohibited without publisher’s
permission.
This
article is available in its entirety by fax for $4.00 per
page.
Visa or MasterCard accepted. To order electronically click here
or call: 847-647-2900 ext. 1323
or fax request to: 847-647-1155.
Please indicate JAT
volume and issue along with page numbers. |
|
Home | Subscribe
| Current Issue | Back Issues
| Search | Advertise | Other Publications
| |
