Cargando…

Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use

OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the accuracy of three screening tools in identifying illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse among a diverse sample of pregnant women. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled a consecutive sample of 500 pregnant women, stratified by trimester...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H., Oga, Emmanuel A., Peters, Erica N., Trocin, Kathleen E., Koszowski, Bartosz, Mark, Katrina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6485306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30969217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003230
_version_ 1783414256349216768
author Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H.
Oga, Emmanuel A.
Peters, Erica N.
Trocin, Kathleen E.
Koszowski, Bartosz
Mark, Katrina
author_facet Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H.
Oga, Emmanuel A.
Peters, Erica N.
Trocin, Kathleen E.
Koszowski, Bartosz
Mark, Katrina
author_sort Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the accuracy of three screening tools in identifying illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse among a diverse sample of pregnant women. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled a consecutive sample of 500 pregnant women, stratified by trimester, receiving care in two prenatal clinical settings in Baltimore, Maryland, from January 2017 to January 2018. All participants were administered three index tests: 4P's Plus, NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST (Modified Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test), and the SURP-P (Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy) scale, and administered reference tests (urine and hair drug testing) at the in-person baseline visit. To assess test–retest reliability of the index tests, screening tool administrations were repeated 1 week later by telephone. For each screening tool, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and test–retest reliability were computed. Results were stratified by age, race, and trimester of pregnancy. RESULTS: Of the 500 enrolled pregnant women, 494 completed the index screening tools, 497 completed reference testing, and 453 underwent test–retest analysis. For the 4P's Plus, sensitivity=90.2% (84.5, 93.8), and specificity=29.6% (24.4, 35.2). For the NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST, sensitivity=79.7% (71.2, 84.2), and specificity=82.8% (78.1, 87.1). For the SURP-P, sensitivity=92.4% (87.6, 95.8) and specificity=21.8% (17.4, 27.2). Test–retest reliability (phi correlation coefficients) was 0.84, 0.77, and 0.79 for the 4P's Plus, NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST and the SURP-P, respectively. For all screening tools, there were differences in validity indices by age and race, but no differences by trimester. CONCLUSION: The SURP-P and 4P's Plus had high sensitivity and negative predictive values, making them more ideal screening tests than the NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST. A clear recommendation for a clinically useful screening tool for prenatal substance use is crucial to allow for prompt and appropriate follow-up and intervention.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6485306
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64853062019-05-29 Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H. Oga, Emmanuel A. Peters, Erica N. Trocin, Kathleen E. Koszowski, Bartosz Mark, Katrina Obstet Gynecol Contents OBJECTIVE: To compare and evaluate the accuracy of three screening tools in identifying illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse among a diverse sample of pregnant women. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study enrolled a consecutive sample of 500 pregnant women, stratified by trimester, receiving care in two prenatal clinical settings in Baltimore, Maryland, from January 2017 to January 2018. All participants were administered three index tests: 4P's Plus, NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST (Modified Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test), and the SURP-P (Substance Use Risk Profile-Pregnancy) scale, and administered reference tests (urine and hair drug testing) at the in-person baseline visit. To assess test–retest reliability of the index tests, screening tool administrations were repeated 1 week later by telephone. For each screening tool, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and test–retest reliability were computed. Results were stratified by age, race, and trimester of pregnancy. RESULTS: Of the 500 enrolled pregnant women, 494 completed the index screening tools, 497 completed reference testing, and 453 underwent test–retest analysis. For the 4P's Plus, sensitivity=90.2% (84.5, 93.8), and specificity=29.6% (24.4, 35.2). For the NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST, sensitivity=79.7% (71.2, 84.2), and specificity=82.8% (78.1, 87.1). For the SURP-P, sensitivity=92.4% (87.6, 95.8) and specificity=21.8% (17.4, 27.2). Test–retest reliability (phi correlation coefficients) was 0.84, 0.77, and 0.79 for the 4P's Plus, NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST and the SURP-P, respectively. For all screening tools, there were differences in validity indices by age and race, but no differences by trimester. CONCLUSION: The SURP-P and 4P's Plus had high sensitivity and negative predictive values, making them more ideal screening tests than the NIDA Quick Screen-ASSIST. A clear recommendation for a clinically useful screening tool for prenatal substance use is crucial to allow for prompt and appropriate follow-up and intervention. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2019-05 2019-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6485306/ /pubmed/30969217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003230 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Contents
Coleman-Cowger, Victoria H.
Oga, Emmanuel A.
Peters, Erica N.
Trocin, Kathleen E.
Koszowski, Bartosz
Mark, Katrina
Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title_full Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title_fullStr Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title_short Accuracy of Three Screening Tools for Prenatal Substance Use
title_sort accuracy of three screening tools for prenatal substance use
topic Contents
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6485306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30969217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003230
work_keys_str_mv AT colemancowgervictoriah accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse
AT ogaemmanuela accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse
AT peterserican accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse
AT trocinkathleene accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse
AT koszowskibartosz accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse
AT markkatrina accuracyofthreescreeningtoolsforprenatalsubstanceuse