Roadside oral fluid testing: Comparison of the results of Drugwipe 5 and Drugwipe Benzodiazepines on-site tests with laboratory confirmation results of oral fluid and whole blood

Pehrsson, Anna; Gunnar, Teemu; Engblom, Charlotta; Seppä, Heikki; Jama, Ahlam; Lillsunde, Pirjo

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.05.022

Cited by 65 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The interval between the collection of oral fluid and whole blood samples was less than one hour in 90% of the collections. More details concerning the collection protocols for each specific country can be found in several publications 11,18,19,20,21 .…”

Section: Sample Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship Between Oral Fluid and Blood Concentrations of Drugs of Abuse in Drivers Suspected of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs

Wille

Raes²,

Lillsunde³

et al. 2009

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Self Cite

139

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the interest in the use of oral fluid as biological matrix has increased significantly, particularly for detecting driving under the influence of drugs (DUID). In this study, the relationship between the oral fluid and blood concentrations of drugs of abuse in drivers suspected of DUID is Nevertheless the data reflect the variability of the OF/B ratios in drivers under the influence of drugs.The wide range of the ratios, however, does not allow reliable calculation of the blood concentrations from oral fluid concentrations.

show abstract

Section: Sample Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship Between Oral Fluid and Blood Concentrations of Drugs of Abuse in Drivers Suspected of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs

Wille

Raes²,

Lillsunde³

et al. 2009

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Self Cite

139

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A review showed that amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine, and opiates are readily detected in OF and exhibit a pharmacokinetic pattern similar to that found in plasma (3 ). Amphetamines, cocaine, and opiates tend to concentrate, owing to their basic nature in the acidic OF, whereas THC (because of high lipophilicity) and benzodiazepines (because of high protein binding) are more difficult to detect, because of low excretion from blood to OF (18,19 ). On the other hand, THC is deposited in the oral cavity when smoked; thus, detection of high THC concentrations in OF may indicate very recent drug use (20 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous Screening and Quantification of 29 Drugs of Abuse in Oral Fluid by Solid-Phase Extraction and Ultraperformance LC-MS/MS

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The European DRUID (Driving under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol And Medicines) project calls for analysis of oral fluid (OF) samples, collected randomly and anonymously at the roadside from drivers in Denmark throughout 2008–2009. To analyze these samples we developed an ultra performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) method for detection of 29 drugs and illicit compounds in OF. The drugs detected were opioids, amphetamines, cocaine, benzodiazepines, and Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Method: Solid-phase extraction was performed with a Gilson ASPEC XL4 system equipped with Bond Elut Certify sample cartridges. OF samples (200 mg) diluted with 5 mL of ammonium acetate/methanol (vol/vol 90:10) buffer were applied to the columns and eluted with 3 mL of acetonitrile with aqueous ammonium hydroxide. Target drugs were quantified by use of a Waters ACQUITY UPLC system coupled to a Waters Quattro Premier XE triple quadrupole (positive electrospray ionization mode, multiple reaction monitoring mode). Results: Extraction recoveries were 36%–114% for all analytes, including Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and benzoylecgonine. The lower limit of quantification was 0.5 μg/kg for all analytes. Total imprecision (CV) was 5.9%–19.4%. With the use of deuterated internal standards for most compounds, the performance of the method was not influenced by matrix effects. A preliminary account of OF samples collected at the roadside showed the presence of amphetamine, cocaine, codeine, Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, tramadol, and zopiclone. Conclusions: The UPLC-MS/MS method makes it possible to detect all 29 analytes in 1 chromatographic run (15 min), including Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and benzoylecgonine, which previously have been difficult to incorporate into multicomponent methods.

show abstract

“…Drugged drivers pose a serious threat to other drivers as well as to themselves. 13) To obtain information about drug abuse in drivers, a comprehensive screening test for such drugs is necessary, even under normal situations where the drivers are not involved in any accidents. 14) In Sweden, a person's driving license is suspended after being convicted for petty drug offense or driving under the influence of drugs.…”

Section: Testing For Drugs Of Abuse In Saliva Of Driversmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reliable oral fluid screening devices for onsite screening of drugged drivers are both useful and convenient for maintaining road safety. 13) Fernández et al 14) screened 632 saliva specimens collected from drivers in Catalonia, Spain for drugs of abuse through an immunoassay test (Cozart R kit; Cozart Bioscience Ltd., Abingdon, UK) and the drugs detected by the screening test were cocaine, cannabis (Δ 9 -tetrahydrocannabinol), opiates (6-monoacetylmorphine), amphetamine, and metamphetamine. Specimens that were tested positive were subjected to GC-MS for confirmation.…”

Section: Testing For Drugs Of Abuse In Saliva Of Driversmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Drugs of Abuse in Biological Specimens

Saito

Kikuchi

et al. 2011

JOURNAL OF HEALTH SCIENCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent reports of the analysis of drugs of abuse in biological specimens are reviewed herein. Different perspectives from reviews so far published and the need for and the background of drug analysis in biological specimens, and difficulty of drug testing in biological specimens are introduced. Comprehensive biological specimens for the analysis of drugs of abuse in forensic science, including oral fluid (saliva), hair, umbilical cord, placenta, meconium, cadaver tissue (brain, adipose), sweat, breath, and nail clippings, in addition to the commonly used blood and urine specimens in clinical chemistry, are described along with their outlines, advantages/disadvantages, and actual examples. Today, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is the method of choice for the analysis of drugs of abuse. A simultaneous screening method for multiple types of drugs has also become popular recently. However, because qualitative determination remains important in forensic science, gas chromatographymass spectrometry (GC-MS) is still in use even if it requires complicated specimen preparation and derivatization procedures. This is because GC-MS is reliable and has been employed ever since for the appraisal of trials.

show abstract

Roadside oral fluid testing: Comparison of the results of Drugwipe 5 and Drugwipe Benzodiazepines on-site tests with laboratory confirmation results of oral fluid and whole blood

Cited by 65 publications

References 27 publications

Relationship Between Oral Fluid and Blood Concentrations of Drugs of Abuse in Drivers Suspected of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs

Relationship Between Oral Fluid and Blood Concentrations of Drugs of Abuse in Drivers Suspected of Driving Under the Influence of Drugs

Simultaneous Screening and Quantification of 29 Drugs of Abuse in Oral Fluid by Solid-Phase Extraction and Ultraperformance LC-MS/MS

Analysis of Drugs of Abuse in Biological Specimens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About