Commercial Ethyl Glucuronide (EtG) and Ethyl Sulfate (EtS) Testing is Not Vulnerable to Incidental Alcohol Exposure in Pregnant Women

Ethyl Glucoronide (EtG) and Ethyl Sulfate (EtS) have shown promise as biomarkers for alcohol and may be sensitive enough for use with pregnant women in whom even low-level alcohol use is important. However, there have been reports of over-sensitivity of EtG and EtS to incidental exposure to sources...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Substance use & misuse 2016-01, Vol.51 (1), p.126-130
Main Authors: Ondersma, Steven J, Beatty, Jessica R, Rosano, Thomas G, Strickler, Ronald C, Graham, Amy E, Sokol, Robert J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Alcohol abuse
Alcohol use
Alcoholism
Biological markers
Biomarkers
Biomarkers - urine
Disinfectants - urine
Drug testing
Ethanol - administration & dosage
Ethanol - urine
Female
Females
Glucuronates
Hand Sanitizers - chemistry
Humans
Metabolites
Mouthwashes - chemistry
Nurses
Nursing
Postpartum women
Pregnancy
Sensitivity
Sulfuric Acid Esters
Tests
Urine
Urine tests
Vulnerability
Womens health
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Ethyl Glucoronide (EtG) and Ethyl Sulfate (EtS) have shown promise as biomarkers for alcohol and may be sensitive enough for use with pregnant women in whom even low-level alcohol use is important. However, there have been reports of over-sensitivity of EtG and EtS to incidental exposure to sources such as alcohol-based hand sanitizer. Further, few studies have evaluated these biomarkers among pregnant women, in whom the dynamics of these metabolites may differ. This study evaluated whether commercial EtG-EtS testing was vulnerable to high levels of environmental exposure to alcohol in pregnant women. Two separate samples of five nurses-one pregnant and the other postpartum, all of whom reported high levels of alcohol-based hand sanitizer use-provided urine samples before and 4-8 hours after rinsing with alcohol-based mouthwash and using hand sanitizer. The five pregnant nurses provided urine samples before, during, and after an 8-hour nursing shift, during which they repeatedly cleansed with alcohol-based hand sanitizer (mean 33.8 uses). The five postpartum nurses used hand sanitizer repeatedly between baseline and follow-up urine samples. No urine samples were positive for EtG-EtS at baseline or follow-up, despite use of mouthwash and-in the pregnant sample-heavy use of hand sanitizer (mean of 33.8 uses) throughout the 8-hour shift. Current, commercially available EtG-EtS testing does not appear vulnerable to even heavy exposure to incidental sources of alcohol among pregnant and postpartum women.
ISSN:1082-6084
1532-2491
DOI:10.3109/10826084.2015.1073324