Experience in the identification of abuse drugs in urines collected under Treatment Alternatives to Street Crime.
This paper describes the criteria and analytical approach that were employed to cope with a mass drug urine screening program. Motives and justifications for selecting one technique over another are covered, along with a detailed description of those methods selected. Advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of each procedure are discussed. Results are presented for over 11,500 samples of urine collected from the criminal segment of Philadelphia's population over a period of six months. These were examined for amphetamine, methamphetamine, amobarbital, butabarbital, pentobarbital, phenobarbital, secobarbital, cocaine, codeine, methadone, and morphine.
D000661:Amphetamine / Q000652:urine; D001463:Barbiturates / Q000652:urine; D002606:Charcoal; D002849:Chromatography, Gas; D002855:Chromatography, Thin Layer; D003042:Cocaine / Q000652:urine; D003415:Crime; D001330:Electronic Data Processing; D005554:Forensic Medicine; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods*; D008691:Methadone / Q000652:urine; D008694:Methamphetamine / Q000652:urine; D009020:Morphine / Q000652:urine; D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations / Q000652:urine*; D013050:Spectrometry, Fluorescence; D019966:Substance-Related Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis*
D001463:Barbiturates; D004364:Pharmaceutical Preparations; D002606:Charcoal; D008694:Methamphetamine; D009020:Morphine; D000661:Amphetamine; D003042:Cocaine; D008691:Methadone