| Title |
Identification of Drugs in Parenteral Pharmaceutical Preparations from a Quality Assurance and a Diversion Program by Direct Analysis in Real-Time AccuTOFTM-Mass Spectrometry (DART-MS)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Analytical Toxicology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/jat/bkw065 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Justin L. Poklis, Amanda J. Mohs, Carl E. Wolf, Alphonse Poklis, Michelle R. Peace |
| Abstract |
In healthcare settings drug diversion and impairment of physicians are major concerns requiring a rapid and efficient method for surveillance and detection. A Direct Analysis in Real Time ion source coupled to a JEOL AccuTOF(TM) time-of-flight mass spectrometer (DART-MS) method was developed to screen parenteral pharmaceutical formulations for potential drug diversion. Parenteral pharmaceutical formulations are also known as injectable formulations and are used with intravenous, subcutaneous, intramuscular and intra-articular administration. A library was created using the mass spectra data collected by a DART-MS operated in switching mode at 20, 60 and 90 V settings. This library contained 17 commonly encountered drugs in parenteral pharmaceutical formulations that included the surgical analgesic: fentanyl, hydromorphone and morphine; anesthetic: baclofen, bupivacaine, ketamine, midazolam, ropivacaine and succinylcholine; and a mixture of other drug classes: caffeine, clonidine, dexamethasone, ephedrine, heparin, methadone, oxytocin and phenylephrine. Randomly selected 200 de-identified parenteral pharmaceutical formulations containing one or more drugs were submitted for analysis to the FIRM Toxicology Laboratory at Virginia Commonwealth University Health and were screened using the DART-MS. The drug contents of the de-identified formulations were previously confirmed by a published high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. The drugs in the formulations were rapidly and successfully identified using the generated library. The DART-MS and HPLC results were in complete agreement for all 200 parenteral pharmaceutical formulations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Researcher | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 13 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 April 2017.
All research outputs
#7,486,175
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Analytical Toxicology
#637
of 1,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,501
of 365,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Analytical Toxicology
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 365,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.