An analytical evaluation of eight on-site oral fluid drug screening devices using laboratory confirmation results from oral fluid

被引:61
作者
Blencowe, Tom [1 ]
Pehrsson, Anna [1 ]
Lillsunde, Pirjo [1 ]
Vimpari, Kari [1 ]
Houwing, Sjoerd [2 ]
Smink, Beitske [3 ]
Mathijssen, Rene [2 ]
Van der Linden, Trudy [4 ]
Legrand, Sara-Ann [4 ]
Pil, Kristof [4 ]
Verstraete, Alain [4 ]
机构
[1] Natl Inst Hlth & Welf, Alcohol & Drug Analyt Unit, FI-00271 Helsinki, Finland
[2] SWOV Inst Rd Safety Res, NL-2260 BB Leidschendam, Netherlands
[3] Netherlands Forens Inst, Dept Toxicol & Pathol, NL-2490 AA The Hague, Netherlands
[4] Univ Ghent, Dept Clin Chem Microbiol & Immunol, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
关键词
On-site testing; Oral fluid; Drugs of abuse; Driving under the influence; SALIVA; CANNABIS; SWEAT;
D O I
10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.11.026
中图分类号
DF [法律]; D9 [法律]; R [医药、卫生];
学科分类号
0301 ; 10 ;
摘要
The performance of eight on-site oral fluid drug screening devices was studied in Belgium, Finland and the Netherlands as a part of the EU-project DRUID. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the reliability of the devices for testing drivers suspected of driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). The performance of the devices was assessed by their ability to detect substances using cut-offs which were set at sufficiently low levels to allow optimal detection of positive DUID cases. The devices were evaluated for the detection of amphetamine(s), cannabis, cocaine, opiates and benzodiazepines when the relevant test was incorporated. Methamphetamine, MDMA and PCP tests that were included in some devices were not evaluated since there were too few positive samples. The device results were compared with confirmation analysis results in oral fluid. The opiates tests appeared to perform relatively well with sensitivity results between 69 and 90%. Amphetamines and benzodiazepines tests had lower sensitivity, although the DrugWipe test evaluated was promising for amphetamine. In particular, it is evident that the cannabis and cocaine tests of the devices still lack sensitivity, although further testing of the cocaine tests is desirable due to the low prevalence and low concentrations encountered in this study. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:173 / 179
页数:7
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   Approximate is better than "exact" for interval estimation of binomial proportions [J].
Agresti, A ;
Coull, BA .
AMERICAN STATISTICIAN, 1998, 52 (02) :119-126
[2]   On-site testing of illicit drugs:: the use of the drug-testing device "Toxiquick®" [J].
Biermann, T ;
Schwarze, B ;
Zedler, B ;
Betz, R .
FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2004, 143 (01) :21-25
[3]  
Blencowe T., 2010, ANAL EVALUATION ORAL
[4]   Laboratory evaluation and field application of roadside oral fluid collectors and drug testing devices [J].
Crouch, Dennis J. ;
Walsh, J. Michael ;
Cangianelli, Leo ;
Quintela, Oscar .
THERAPEUTIC DRUG MONITORING, 2008, 30 (02) :188-195
[5]   An evaluation of selected oral fluid point-of-collection drug-testing devices [J].
Crouch, DJ ;
Walsh, JM ;
Flegel, R ;
Cangianelli, L ;
Baudys, J ;
Atkins, R .
JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL TOXICOLOGY, 2005, 29 (04) :244-248
[6]  
Drummer O., 2009, PROT WORKSH DRUG DRI, P66
[7]  
Drummer O.H., 2001, FORENSIC PHARM DRUGS
[8]   Drugs in oral fluid in randomly selected drivers [J].
Drummer, Olaf H. ;
Gerostamoulos, Dimitri ;
Chu, Mark ;
Swann, Philip ;
Boorman, Martin ;
Cairns, Ian .
FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 170 (2-3) :105-110
[9]   Analytical evaluation of a rapid on-site oral fluid drug test [J].
Goessaert, An-Sofie ;
Pil, Kristof ;
Veramme, Jolien ;
Verstraete, Alain .
ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY, 2010, 396 (07) :2461-2468
[10]   A comparison between on-site immunoassay drug-testing devices and laboratory results [J].
Grönholm, M ;
Lillsunde, P .
FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2001, 121 (1-2) :37-46