INDIANAPOLIS - Methadone clinics would be more strictly regulated and patients would undergo marijuana testing under legislation the Indiana House passed and sent to Gov. Mitch Daniels yesterday.

Rep. Steve Stemler, the bill's sponsor, said the drug-testing provisions could reduce the number of patients at the Southern Indiana Treatment Center in Clark County and at other methadone clinics located along the state's borders.

He said many patients leave their home states - where marijuana testing is required - to come to Indiana's clinics. "This will make a huge impact," said Stemler, D-Jeffersonville. "I feel confident that will happen."

The Clark County clinic is the state's second largest, serving nearly 2,000 patients in 2005. About two-thirds of those patients came from Kentucky. In all, Indiana's methadone clinics serve more than 10,000 patients annually, with more than half coming from other states.

The final version of Senate Bill 157, which passed the House 89-0, does not include an earlier amendment that would have required the clinic's patients to have a designated driver after their appointments. The Senate earlier approved the legislation.

Stemler had sought the requirement, saying that the federal FDA puts methadone - which is used to treat addictions to heroin, OxyContin and other drugs - in the same classification as those medicines used for outpatient surgeries or procedures.

In those cases, hospitals or medical centers require designated drivers. But Stemler said yesterday that the proposal proved too controversial and was deleted from the bill. At the time that amendment was considered, Tim Bohman, regional manager for CRC Health, which owns the Clark County center, told lawmakers that patients have a high tolerance for opiates and therefore can function normally after a treatment.

SB 157 also requires the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration to pass new rules to regulate methadone clinics and requires state approval for all patients who would receive more than 14 take-home doses of the drug.

Patients who test positive for marijuana would lose the right to have the popular take-home doses. That means they would have to go to the clinic daily to receive their methadone.

The bill also gives Family and Social Services new authority to fine clinics that do not follow state rules.

Source: Methadone bill requires tests for marijuana

Copyright: 2008, Courier Journal, Louisville, KY

A medic at the Royal Devon amp; Exeter Hospital who tested positive for cannabis after failing to turn up for work has been struck off. Jennie Andrews, a biomedical hospital scientist, also tried to persuade a colleague to provide a urine test sample for her, a disciplinary hearing in London heard.

John Williams, chairman of a Health Professions Council panel, ordered the striking off of Andrews, who worked in microbiology. In findings just published, he said: "The behaviour was deliberate abuse of alcohol and the use of cannabis, a lack of honesty and integrity and a lack of insight into the effect of her behaviour."

The hearing had been told that Andrews was employed by the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust from December, 2004, until her dismissal on February 28, last year. During that time, she didn't turn up for work on several occasions due to drug and alcohol-related issues. She was said to have failed to attend work on May 26, 2006, without contacting her employer to explain her absence, and on September 25, 2006, she had undergone tests for drugs and alcohol which had proved positive for cannabis.

During a meeting with a doctor on October 11, 2006, to discuss the test results, the panel's findings say Andrews had admitted using cannabis regularly and had later conceded that some of her previous absences from work were the result of the effects of too much alcohol. She again didn't turn up for work on November 23, 2006, due to "alcohol-related issues" and the following month tested positive again for cannabis.

The hearing had been told that on January 15, 2007 - when she was required to provide a further urine sample - she had requested the help of a colleague in providing the sample on her behalf. Describing her attendance at work as "patchy" at the relevant time with a "lack of communication", Mr Williams said it demonstrated "she was taking substances which had the potential to affect her cognitive function". Without evidence of any change in Ms Andrews' situation since the relevant events, Mr Williams said the panel had decided to erase the medic's name from the register of medical practitioners.

An RD &E spokeswoman: "In common with all NHS organisations, the RD &E has robust human resources policies and procedures in place. "We consider that we took the appropriate action to first monitor and then dismiss this employee, when it became apparent that there was a serious issue which could not be resolved."

Source: this is exeter - news, entertainment, jobs, homes and cars

There is currently a profusion of near-patient testing devices that have been specifically targeted at drug dependency units and clinics. Some of these devices have been shown to produce accurate results. However, some devices suffer from inappropriate labeling, which together with the subjective interpretation of poorly defined reaction end-point markers, leads to misinterpretation of the results generated.

A literature search was conducted regarding the use and evaluation of near-patient testing devices for drugs-of-abuse screening. The results of this research, together our own practical evaluations of such devices, have been collated into this review.

It is proposed that although near-patient testing devices may be useful in remote areas or where rapid action needs to be taken, it should be remembered that they provide only initial screening data and may yield false-positive or flase-negative results. Such devices need to be used with caution because a rapid but unconfirmed result may lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment for those who have a drug problem. It should be noted that a single result, which may be inaccurate, could lead to the cessation of treatment and a failure to provide care for those in greatest need. In addition, false-positive results may also have medico-legal implications, especially with the initiation of the drug testing and treatment orders.

Near-patient testing devices for drugs of abuse could be an expensive and potentially inaccurate means to monitor patient treatment and drug abuse status.