Premium
The Usefulness of Direct Ethanol Metabolites in Assessing Alcohol Intake in Nonintoxicated Male Patients in an Emergency Room Setting
Author(s) -
Kip Miriam Julia,
Spies Claudia Doris,
Neumann Tim,
Nachbar Yvonne,
Alling Christer,
Aradottir Steina,
Weinmann Wolfgang,
Wurst Friedrich Martin
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
alcoholism: clinical and experimental research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.267
H-Index - 153
eISSN - 1530-0277
pISSN - 0145-6008
DOI - 10.1111/j.1530-0277.2008.00696.x
Subject(s) - phosphatidylethanol , carbohydrate deficient transferrin , alcohol use disorders identification test , ethyl glucuronide , medicine , alcohol , audit , alcohol intake , urine , mean corpuscular volume , ethanol , alcohol consumption , gastroenterology , poison control , emergency medicine , injury prevention , chemistry , phospholipid , biochemistry , management , membrane , phosphatidylcholine , hematocrit , organic chemistry , economics
Background: A major part of medical pathology in internal medicine is associated with chronic alcoholism. The aim of the current study was to investigate whether screening for Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD) can be improved through determination of direct ethanol metabolites compared to traditional biological state markers, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and additional self‐reports beyond the detection time period of a positive blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Methods: A total of 74 blood alcohol negative male patients who presented at the emergency room with either thoracic or gastrointestinal complaints were included. Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) was determined in whole blood, and ethyl glucuronide (EtG) in serum and urine samples. Traditional biological state markers [carbohydrate deficient transferrin (%CDT), gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT), mean corpuscular volume (MCV)] were determined. The AUDIT was obtained and furthermore, all patients completed an additional self‐report of alcohol consumption. Patients were divided into two (2) groups: AUDIT scores < 8 and AUDIT scores ≥ 8. Results: After assessment of the AUDIT, patients were allocated to one of the following groups: patients with AUDIT scores < 8 ( n = 52) and with AUDIT scores ≥ 8 ( n = 22). Twenty‐five percent of the patients with AUDIT scores below the cut‐off ( n = 13/52) were tested positive for both PEth and UEtG. Of the patients who declared to be sober during the past 12 months, 38.5% were tested positive for PEth and UEtG. PEth discriminated similarly as %CDT for AUDIT scores ≥ 8 (AUC: 0.672; 95%CI 0.524 to 0.821). Self‐reports of alcohol consumption were unreliable. Conclusion: Determination of direct ethanol metabolites such as PEth and UEtG provides additional evidence in screening for AUD in an ER setting. Determination of PEth might be considered complementary with or alternatively to %CDT.