Monitoring ethanol exposure in a clinical setting by analysis of blood, breath, saliva, and urine
Monitoring ethanol exposure in a clinical setting by analysis of blood, breath, saliva, and urine
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/00000374-199909000-00004
复制
发表时间：
1999-09-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Jones, AW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bendtsen, P;Hultberg, J;Jones, AW
背景资料：已经开发了几种新技术，用于估计血液酒精浓度（BAC），其中包括通过分析唾液标本中的酒精。QED (TM)是一种新型定量测试，旨在测量唾液中的乙醇，并在各种实验环境中获得了令人鼓舞的结果。方法：在本研究中，对28名患者在抵达时和从戒毒所出院时进行了静脉血液酒精浓度测定。这些结果与呼吸、唾液和尿液中的酒精浓度进行了比较。结果：42例患者尿中乙醇浓度均高于BAC值（平均差0.62mg/ml），且个体间相关系数r = 0.92;手持式呼吸-酒精仪（Alcolmeter S-D2）与静脉BAC显示出良好的一致性（n = 52; r = 0.97;平均差异，0.04 mg/ml）。唾液酒精测试未能在我们的测试（n = 36; r = 0.75;平均差异，0.55毫克/毫升），主要是因为遇到的问题，在获得足够的样本进行分析，在高度中毒patients.Conclusions：由于相对较低的成本Q.E.D. (TM)唾液测试，与呼气酒精分析仪相比，在遇到轻度至中度中毒者的公共卫生环境中，唾液测试可能是一种具有成本效益的替代方案。
Background: Several new technologies have been developed for estimating blood alcohol concentration (BAC), among others, by the analysis of alcohol in saliva specimens. The Q.E.D.(TM) is a new quantitative test designed for measuring ethanol in saliva and promising results have been obtained in various experimental settings.Methods: In the present study, venous BAC was determined in 28 patients on arrival and when they were discharged from a detoxification unit. The results were compared with breath, saliva, and urine alcohol concentrations. Headspace gas chromatography was used for analysis of ethanol in blood and urine, and breath alcohol was determined with an Alcolmeter S-D2 instrument.Results: The concentration of alcohol in urine was always higher than the BAC (mean difference, 0.62 mg/ml) and individual values were highly correlated (n = 42; r = 0.92). The handheld breath-alcohol instrument (Alcolmeter S-D2) showed good agreement with venous BAC (n = 52; r = 0.97; mean difference, 0.04 mg/ml). The saliva-alcohol test failed to perform well in our tests (n = 36; r = 0.75; mean difference, 0.55 mg/ml) mainly because of problems encountered in obtaining a sufficient sample for analysis in highly intoxicated patients.Conclusions: Because of the relatively low cost of the Q.E.D.(TM) saliva test, in comparison with a breath alcohol analyzer, the saliva test could be a cost-effective alternative in public health settings where mildly to moderately intoxicated persons are encountered.