High resolution mass spectrometry for quantitative analysis and untargeted screening of algal toxins in mussels and passive samplers

Measurement of marine algal toxins has traditionally focussed on shellfish monitoring while, over the last decade, passive sampling has been introduced as a complementary tool for exploratory studies. Since 2011, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has been adopted as the EU reference method (No.15/2011) for detection and quantitation of lipophilic toxins. Traditional LC-MS approaches have been based on low-resolution mass spectrometry (LRMS), however, advances in instrument platforms have led to a heightened interest in the use of high-resolution mass spectrometry (HRMS) for toxin detection. This work describes the use of HRMS in combination with passive sampling as a progressive approach to marine algal toxin surveys. Experiments focused on comparison of LRMS and HRMS for determination of a broad range of toxins in shellfish and passive samplers. Matrix effects are an important issue to address in LC-MS; therefore, this phenomenon was evaluated for mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis) and passive samplers using LRMS (triple quadrupole) and HRMS (quadrupole time-of-flight and Orbitrap) instruments. Matrix-matched calibration solutions containing okadaic acid and dinophysistoxins, pectenotoxin, azaspiracids, yessotoxins, domoic acid, pinnatoxins, gymnodimine A and 13-desmethyl spirolide C were prepared. Similar matrix effects were observed on all instruments types. Most notably, there was ion enhancement for pectenotoxins, okadaic acid/dinophysistoxins on one hand, and ion suppression for yessotoxins on the other. Interestingly, the ion selected for quantitation of PTX2 also influenced the magnitude of matrix effects, with the sodium adduct typically exhibiting less susceptibility to matrix effects than the ammonium adduct. As expected, mussel as a biological matrix, quantitatively produced significantly more matrix effects than passive sampler extracts, irrespective of toxin. Sample dilution was demonstrated as an effective measure to reduce matrix effects for all compounds, and was found to be particularly useful for the non-targeted approach. Limits of detection and method accuracy were comparable between the systems tested, demonstrating the applicability of HRMS as an effective tool for screening and quantitative analysis. HRMS offers the advantage of untargeted analysis, meaning that datasets can be retrospectively analysed. HRMS (full scan) chromatograms of passive samplers yielded significantly less complex data sets than mussels, and were thus more easily screened for unknowns. Consequently, we recommend the use of HRMS in combination with passive sampling for studies investigating emerging or hitherto uncharacterised toxins.

Neonatal palliative care attitude scale : development of an instrument to measure the barriers to and facilitators of palliative care in neonatal nursing

OBJECTIVE The aim of this research project was to obtain an understanding of the barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care in neonatal nursing. This article reports the first phase of this research: to develop and administer an instrument to measure the attitudes of neonatal nurses to palliative care. METHODS The instrument developed for this research (the Neonatal Palliative Care Attitude Scale) underwent face and content validity testing with an expert panel and was pilot tested to establish temporal stability. It was then administered to a population sample of 1285 neonatal nurses in Australian NICUs, with a response rate of 50% (N 645). Exploratory factor-analysis techniques were conducted to identify scales and subscales of the instrument. RESULTS Data-reduction techniques using principal components analysis were used. Using the criteria of eigenvalues being 1, the items in the Neonatal Palliative Care Attitude Scale extracted 6 factors, which accounted for 48.1% of the variance among the items. By further examining the questions within each factor and the Cronbach’s of items loading on each factor, factors were accepted or rejected. This resulted in acceptance of 3 factors indicating the barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice. The constructs represented by these factors indicated barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice relating to (1) the organization in which the nurse practices, (2) the available resources to support a palliative model of care, and (3) the technological imperatives and parental demands. CONCLUSIONS The subscales identified by this analysis identified items that measured both barriers to and facilitators of palliative care practice in neonatal nursing. While establishing preliminary reliability of the instrument by using exploratory factor-analysis techniques, further testing of this instrument with different samples of neonatal nurses is necessary using a confirmatory factor-analysis approach.

The STRATIFY tool and clinical judgment were poor predictors of falling in an acute hospital setting

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of the STRATIFY falls tool with nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting patient falls. Study Design and Setting: A prospective cohort study was conducted among the inpatients of an acute tertiary hospital. Participants were patients over 65 years of age admitted to any hospital unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) of the instrument and nurses’ clinical judgments in predicting falls were calculated. Results: Seven hundred and eighty-eight patients were screened and followed up during the study period. The fall prevalence was 9.2%. Of the 335 patients classified as being ‘‘at risk’’ for falling using the STRATIFY tool, 59 (17.6%) did sustain a fall (sensitivity50.82, specificity50.61, PPV50.18, NPV50.97). Nurses judged that 501 patients were at risk of falling and, of these, 60 (12.0%) fell (sensitivity50.84, specificity50.38, PPV50.12, NPV50.96). The STRATIFY tool correctly identified significantly more patients as either fallers or nonfallers than the nurses (P50.027). Conclusion: Considering the poor specificity and high rates of false-positive results for both the STRATIFY tool and nurses’ clinical judgments, we conclude that neither of these approaches are useful for screening of falls in acute hospital settings.

Screening for drugs in oral fluid : illicit drug use and drug driving in a sample of urban and regional Queensland motorists

Police services in a number of Australian states and overseas jurisdictions have begun to implement or consider random road-side drug testing of drivers. This paper outlines research conducted to provide an estimate of the extent of drug driving in a sample of Queensland drivers in regional, rural and metropolitan areas. Oral fluid samples were collected from 2657 Queensland motorists and screened for illicit substances including cannabis (delta 9 tetrahydrocannibinol [THC]), amphetamines, ecstasy, and cocaine. Overall, 3.8% of the sample (n = 101) screened positive for at least one illicit substance, although multiple drugs were identified in a sample of 23 respondents. The most common drugs detected in oral fluid were ecstasy (n = 53), and cannabis (n = 46) followed by amphetamines (n = 23). A key finding was that cannabis was confirmed as the most common self-reported drug combined with driving and that individuals who tested positive to any drug through oral fluid analysis were also more likely to report the highest frequency of drug driving. Furthermore, a comparison between drug vs. drink driving detection rates for one region of the study, revealed a higher detection rate for drug driving (3.8%) vs. drink driving (0.8%). This research provides evidence that drug driving is relatively prevalent on Queensland roads, and may in fact be more common than drink driving. This paper will further outline the study findings’ and present possible directions for future drug driving research.