Suspected synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist intoxication: Does analysis of samples reflect the presence of suspected agents?

BACKGROUND: There has been a surge in synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist (SCRA) exposures reported in recent years. The constituents of SCRA preparations are constantly evolving and rarely confirmed. We sought to characterize the constituents of reported SCRA exposures presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Patients who presented to two academic EDs in Washington, DC with reported or suspected SCRA exposure from July 2015-July 2016 were enrolled at the discretion of the treating provider. Blood and/or urine samples were obtained as part of routine clinical care and sent to the DC medical examiner's office for identification of known SCRAs with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-mass spectrometry. Standard toxicology screens were additionally performed to determine the presence of other drugs of abuse. RESULTS: 128 samples were analyzed. Seventy-one (55.5%) were positive for an SCRA. The most common SCRAs detected were AB-fubinaca (28, 39.4%), ADB-fubinaca (15, 21.1%), AB-chminaca 3-methyl-butanoic acid (15, 21.1%), ADB-chminaca (14, 19.7%), and 5-flouro-PB-22 (8, 11.3%). Fifty-seven (44.5%) samples were negative for an SCRA, of which 28 (21.9%) were positive for another substance, most commonly delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and phencyclidine. An additional 29 (22.7%) patients had both negative SCRA and toxicology screens. CONCLUSIONS: Of patients presenting with reported SCRA intoxication, 55.5% had detectable SCRAs on analytical testing. These results suggest that in a considerable proportion of cases, clinicians are mis-attributing the effects of other drugs or medical conditions to SCRA use. The individual SCRAs detected in our study differed from compounds detected in earlier studies, suggesting there has been a change in constituents.

Medication Allergy and Adverse Drug Reaction Documentation Discrepancies in an Urban, Academic Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Medication histories, including knowledge of allergies and adverse drug reactions (ADRs), are a nationally recognized quality measure. Medication histories in the emergency department (ED) are often inaccurate or incomplete. Our objective was to determine the prevalence and nature of medication allergy and ADR discrepancies in an urban ED. METHODS: This was a prospective observational descriptive study, enrolling a convenience sample of adults over 7 months at a single academic urban ED. Trained personnel recorded patient demographics and number of daily medications. Patients listed any prior drug allergies or non-allergic ADRs. Following the ED encounter, the patients' self-reported allergies and ADRs were compared to the electronic medical record (EMR) to identify and describe discrepancies. RESULTS: A sample of 1014 patients, predominantly black (81%), female (60%), and in the 18- to 59-year-old range (69%), was recruited. Most patients were taking at least one daily medication (74%). Three hundred fifteen patients reported at least one allergy (31%), and 252 (25%) at least one ADR. Four hundred sixteen patients (41%) had a discrepancy between their self-report of allergy or ADR and the EMR. Omissions were the most frequent discrepancy. Full descriptions of allergies or ADR were present in 18.4% of charts. Fifty-seven patients (5.6%) were administered a medication which could have interacted with a documented allergy or ADR; none of the allergy EMR records were updated to reflected this. CONCLUSIONS: In this cross-sectional ED study, drug allergies and ADRs were both highly prevalent. There were significant discrepancies in documentation of allergies and ADRs between patient self-report and the EMR.