General Internal Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, 111 E. 210 St, Bronx, NY, 10467, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Nov;27(11):1521-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2165-7. Epub 2012 Jul 20.
Urine drug testing (UDT) can help identify misuse or diversion of opioid medications among patients with chronic pain. However, misinterpreting results can lead to false reassurance or erroneous conclusions about drug use.
To examine the relationship between resident physicians' knowledge about UDT interpretation and confidence in their ability to interpret UDT results.
Cross-sectional survey.
Internal medicine residents in a university health system in the Bronx, from 2010 to 2011.
We assessed knowledge using a 7-item scale (UDT knowledge score), and confidence in UDT interpretation using a single statement ("I feel confident in my ability to interpret the results of urine drug tests"). We conducted chi-square tests, t-tests, and logistic regression to determine the association between knowledge and confidence, and in exploratory analyses to examine whether resident characteristics (gender, training level, and UDT use) moderated the relationship between knowledge and confidence.
Among 99 residents, the mean UDT knowledge score was 3.0 out of 7 (SD 1.2). Although 55 (56 %) of residents felt confident in their ability to interpret UDT results, 40 (73 %) of confident residents had a knowledge score of 3 or lower. Knowledge score was not associated with confidence among the full sample or when stratified by training level or UDT use. The association between knowledge and confidence differed significantly by gender (interaction term p<0.01). Adjusting for training level and UDT use, knowledge was positively associated with confidence among females (AOR 1.79, 95 % CI: 1.06, 3.30), and negatively associated with confidence among males (AOR 0.47, 95 % CI: 0.23, 0.98).
Despite poor knowledge about UDT interpretation, most resident physicians felt confident in their ability to interpret UDT results. Gender differences warrant further exploration, but even confident physicians who use UDT should evaluate their proficiency in interpreting UDT results. Educational initiatives should emphasize the complexities of UDT interpretation.
尿液药物检测(UDT)可帮助识别慢性疼痛患者中阿片类药物的滥用或转移。然而,错误地解释结果可能会导致对药物使用的错误保证或错误结论。
研究住院医师对 UDT 解释的知识与他们对解释 UDT 结果的能力的信心之间的关系。
横断面调查。
2010 年至 2011 年,来自布朗克斯大学医疗系统的内科住院医师。
我们使用 7 项量表(UDT 知识评分)评估知识,使用一项陈述(“我对自己解释尿液药物检测结果的能力有信心”)评估对 UDT 解释的信心。我们进行了卡方检验、t 检验和逻辑回归,以确定知识与信心之间的关联,并进行探索性分析,以检查居民特征(性别、培训水平和 UDT 使用)是否调节了知识与信心之间的关系。
在 99 名居民中,UDT 知识评分的平均值为 7 分制中的 3.0 分(标准差 1.2)。尽管 55 名(56%)居民对自己解释 UDT 结果的能力有信心,但 40 名(73%)有信心的居民的知识得分在 3 分或以下。在整个样本或按培训水平或 UDT 使用分层时,知识得分与信心之间均无关联。知识与信心之间的关联在性别方面差异显著(交互项 p<0.01)。在校正培训水平和 UDT 使用后,知识与女性的信心呈正相关(优势比 1.79,95%置信区间:1.06,3.30),与男性的信心呈负相关(优势比 0.47,95%置信区间:0.23,0.98)。
尽管对 UDT 解释的了解较差,但大多数住院医师对自己解释 UDT 结果的能力有信心。性别差异值得进一步探讨,但即使是使用 UDT 的有信心的医师也应评估自己解释 UDT 结果的熟练程度。教育计划应强调 UDT 解释的复杂性。