Psychiatry residents’ and fellows’ confidence and knowledge in interpreting urine drug testing results related to opioids

Abstract

Background: Prior studies have suggested that physicians and residents may not have sufficient knowledge to appropriately interpret urine drug tests (UDTs) in patients who are prescribed opioids or using illicit substances. Therefore, the aim of this study was to survey psychiatry residents and fellows about their confidence and knowledge in interpreting UDTs in patients with chronic pain or receiving office-based opioid treatment. Methods: All psychiatry residency and fellowship program directors in the New England states were approached to recruit their trainees to participate in an anonymous online survey including a 7-item knowledge test. Results: A total of 93 residents and fellows completed the survey. Only a minority (24.7%) reported any prior training in UDT interpretation. A majority (62.6%) felt confident about interpreting UDTs. The mean total score for the knowledge test was 3.5 (SD =1.1, range: 1–6). There were no significant differences in total score by confidence in UDT interpretation (3.7 vs. 3.4, t = −1.17, nonsignificant [NS]), nor by prior training in UDT interpretation (3.8 vs. 3.5, t = −1.22, NS). Conclusions: Psychiatry residents and fellows infrequently receive training in UDT interpretation, score poorly on the knowledge test, and their confidence in UDT interpretation does not reflect their knowledge. Future research should evaluate educational interventions that improve UDT interpretation among psychiatry residents and fellows.

Keywords:

• Chronic pain
• opioid use disorder
• opioids
• urine drug testing

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge Jennifer Zinser in her the assistance with data collection.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (1K23DA042326-01A1) (to J.S.). The funding organization had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Notes on contributors

Joji Suzuki

All authors contributed to the design and conception, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and all revisions.

Stephanie Garayalde,

All authors contributed to the design and conception, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and all revisions.

Martekuor Dodoo,

All authors contributed to the design and conception, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and all revisions.

Claudia Rodriguez,

All authors contributed to the design and conception, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and all revisions.