The validation of self‐reported smoking status by analysing cotinine levels in stimulated and unstimulated saliva, serum and urine

Oral Diseases - Tập 10 Số 5 - Trang 287-293 - 2004
Vivian Binnie1, Stacey Mchugh1, L.M.D. Macpherson1, B Borland2, KERRY J. MOIR3, K. Malik4
1Glasgow Dental School, Glasgow, UK
2Department of Biochemistry, North Glasgow NHS Trust, Gartnavel General Hospital, Glasgow, UK
3Royal Dental Hospital of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
4Birmingham Dental School, Birmingham, UK

Tóm tắt

Objectives:  Cotinine, a nicotine metabolite, can be used to measure exposure to tobacco smoke. The aim of this study was to compare cotinine levels in different biological fluids collected from both smokers and non‐smokers and to relate the findings to self‐reported smoking status. Data were also collected concerning the acceptability of the differing methods of sample collection.Material and method:  Patients recruited to the study were asked to provide samples of urine, blood and saliva (both stimulated and unstimulated). Data collected from patients by questionnaire included information on smoking behaviour such as daily number of cigarettes and environmental exposure to smoke. After the sample collection, patients were asked to rate the acceptability of each sampling method. Samples were analysed using enzyme immunoassay (EIA) kits.Results:  In total, 80 patients participated, with 49 being smokers and 31 being non‐smokers. There was clear differentiation between smokers and non‐smokers (P < 0.001) for all the different samples in terms of cotinine. A significant relationship was seen between cotinine and daily number of cigarettes for both salivas and urine (all P < 0.001) but not for serum. Participants found serum and urine collection methodologies ‘very acceptable’ (67 and 66%, respectively) whereas 9% found collection of stimulated saliva ‘not at all acceptable’.Conclusion:  Cotinine, whatever the collection method and analysed by EIA kits, shows good differentiation between smokers and non‐smokers. Salivary samples have the advantage of being non‐invasive, although collection methodology is important, as cotinine levels may vary.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Bajekal M, 2003, Health survey for England, 2001

10.1016/0030-4220(82)90389-9

10.1093/jat/24.5.333

Callum C, 1998, The UK smoking epidemic: deaths in 1995

10.1038/sj.bdj.4808944

10.1080/00039896.1990.9935929

10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010200

10.1016/0091-7435(90)90020-K

10.1111/j.2042-7158.1990.tb06592.x

10.1016/0306-4603(92)90034-S

10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91386-3

10.1177/00220345970760100601

10.1038/sj.bdj.4809067

10.1093/clinchem/32.6.979

10.14219/jada.archive.1999.0335

McCann MF, 2000, A survey of primary care dental practitioners’ oral cancer‐related practices and training requirements, Comm Dent Health, 17, 24

10.1080/14622200210141266

10.1159/000292390

10.1111/j.1360-0443.1997.tb03204.x

Shaw A, 2000, Scottish health survey 1998

10.1038/sj.bdj.4809796

10.1080/14622200210123581

10.1902/annals.1998.3.1.88

10.2105/AJPH.83.9.1335

Warnakulasuriya S, 2002, Effectiveness of tobacco counselling in the dental office, J Dent Edu, 66, 1079, 10.1002/j.0022-0337.2002.66.9.tb03577.x

10.1038/sj.bdj.4810266

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Oral Diseases

Tập 10 Số 5

287-293

Thông tin tác giả