Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Analytical evaluation of five oral fluid drug testing devices

Cristina Isalberti UGent, Sylvie Van Stechelman, Sara-Ann Legrand UGent, Gertrude Van der Linden and Alain Verstraete UGent (2010) TOXICHEM KRIMTECH. 77(3). p.199-199
abstract
Introduction: The correlation with blood drug presence and the easiness of sample collection make oral fluid an ideal matrix for roadside drug tests targeting impaired drivers. Aim: To evaluate the reliability of five oral fluid testing devices: Varian OraLab®6, Dräger DrugTest® 5000, Cozart® DDS 806, Mavand RapidSTAT® and Innovacon OrAlert. Method: More than 760 samples were collected from volunteers either at drug addiction treatment centres or during roadside sessions. Target drug classes were amphetamines, cannabinoids, cocaine and opiates for all devices. Dräger DrugTest® 5000 (137 samples tested), Cozart® DDS 806 (n=138) and Mavand Rapid STAT® (n=133) could also detect the presence of benzodiazepines, while phencyclidine could be detected using Varian OraLab® 6 (n=249) and Innovacon OrAlert (n=110). Samples were tested on-site with one of the selected devices. Volunteers provided an additional oral fluid sample for confirmation analysis by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and prevalence were calculated applying Belgian legal confirmation cut-offs. Results : All devices showed good specificity for all drug classes. Sensitivity and accuracy were very variable among devices and drug classes. Overall, when applying Belgian law cut-offs, sensitivity was always unsatisfactory for cocaine (highest sensitivity 50%), moderate or very low for cannabis and amphetamines (23-80% and 17-75% respectively). Conclusions : Considering that cannabis, followed by amphetamines, is the most prevalent drug among impaired drivers in Belgium, only one device was sensitive enough to be used during roadside police controls. This abstract has been produced under the project “Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines” (DRUID) financed by the European Community within the framework of the EU 6th Framework Program. This abstract reflects only the author's view. The European Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
conference
publication status
published
subject
keyword
driving under the influence, roadside drug test device, oral fluid, driving impairing drugs, sensitivity
in
TOXICHEM KRIMTECH
Toxichem Krimtech
editor
Hans Maurer, Frank Musshoff, Thomas Kraemer, Frank Peters and Stefan Toennes
volume
77
issue
3
issue title
Program and abstracts of the 48th annual meeting of TIAFT
article number
P-5
pages
199 - 199
publisher
GTFCh
place of publication
Jena, Germany
conference name
48th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists (TIAFT) : Joint Meeting with the Society of Toxicological and Forensic Chemistry (GTFCh)
conference location
Bonn, Germany
conference start
2010-08-29
conference end
2010-09-03
ISSN
2190-3441
project
41E04506
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
C3
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
1163514
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-1163514
alternative location
http://www.gtfch.org/cms/images/stories/media/tk/tk77_3/abstractposter1to100.pdf
date created
2011-02-22 10:16:31
date last changed
2017-01-02 09:53:10
@inproceedings{1163514,
  abstract     = {Introduction: The correlation with blood drug presence and the easiness of sample collection make oral fluid an ideal matrix for roadside drug tests targeting impaired drivers. 
Aim: To evaluate the reliability of five oral fluid testing devices: Varian OraLab{\textregistered}6, Dr{\"a}ger DrugTest{\textregistered} 5000, Cozart{\textregistered} DDS 806, Mavand RapidSTAT{\textregistered} and Innovacon OrAlert. 
Method: More than 760 samples were collected from volunteers either at drug addiction treatment centres or during roadside sessions. Target drug classes were amphetamines, cannabinoids, cocaine and opiates for all devices. Dr{\"a}ger DrugTest{\textregistered} 5000 (137 samples tested), Cozart{\textregistered} DDS 806 (n=138) and Mavand Rapid STAT{\textregistered} (n=133) could also detect the presence of benzodiazepines, while phencyclidine could be detected using Varian OraLab{\textregistered} 6 (n=249) and Innovacon OrAlert (n=110). Samples were tested on-site with one of the selected devices. Volunteers provided an additional oral fluid sample for confirmation analysis by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and prevalence were calculated applying Belgian legal confirmation cut-offs.
Results : All devices showed good specificity for all drug classes. Sensitivity and accuracy were very variable among devices and drug classes. Overall, when applying Belgian law cut-offs, sensitivity was always unsatisfactory for cocaine (highest sensitivity 50\%), moderate or very low for cannabis and amphetamines (23-80\% and 17-75\% respectively).
Conclusions : Considering that cannabis, followed by amphetamines, is the most prevalent drug among impaired drivers in Belgium, only one device was sensitive enough to be used during roadside police controls. This abstract has been produced under the project {\textquotedblleft}Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines{\textquotedblright} (DRUID) financed by the European Community within the framework of the EU 6th Framework Program. This abstract reflects only the author's view. The European Community is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained therein},
  articleno    = {P-5},
  author       = {Isalberti, Cristina and Van Stechelman, Sylvie and Legrand, Sara-Ann and Van der Linden, Gertrude and Verstraete, Alain},
  booktitle    = {TOXICHEM KRIMTECH},
  editor       = {Maurer, Hans and Musshoff, Frank and Kraemer, Thomas and Peters, Frank and Toennes, Stefan},
  issn         = {2190-3441},
  keyword      = {driving under the influence,roadside drug test device,oral fluid,driving impairing drugs,sensitivity},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Bonn, Germany},
  number       = {3},
  pages        = {P-5:199--P-5:199},
  publisher    = {GTFCh},
  title        = {Analytical evaluation of five oral fluid drug testing devices},
  url          = {http://www.gtfch.org/cms/images/stories/media/tk/tk77\_3/abstractposter1to100.pdf},
  volume       = {77},
  year         = {2010},
}

Chicago
Isalberti, Cristina, Sylvie Van Stechelman, Sara-Ann Legrand, Gertrude Van der Linden, and Alain Verstraete. 2010. “Analytical Evaluation of Five Oral Fluid Drug Testing Devices.” In Toxichem Krimtech, ed. Hans Maurer, Frank Musshoff, Thomas Kraemer, Frank Peters, and Stefan Toennes, 77:199–199. Jena, Germany: GTFCh.
APA
Isalberti, C., Van Stechelman, S., Legrand, S.-A., Van der Linden, G., & Verstraete, A. (2010). Analytical evaluation of five oral fluid drug testing devices. In H. Maurer, F. Musshoff, T. Kraemer, F. Peters, & S. Toennes (Eds.), TOXICHEM KRIMTECH (Vol. 77, pp. 199–199). Presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists (TIAFT) : Joint Meeting with the Society of Toxicological and Forensic Chemistry (GTFCh), Jena, Germany: GTFCh.
Vancouver
1.
Isalberti C, Van Stechelman S, Legrand S-A, Van der Linden G, Verstraete A. Analytical evaluation of five oral fluid drug testing devices. In: Maurer H, Musshoff F, Kraemer T, Peters F, Toennes S, editors. TOXICHEM KRIMTECH. Jena, Germany: GTFCh; 2010. p. 199–199.
MLA
Isalberti, Cristina, Sylvie Van Stechelman, Sara-Ann Legrand, et al. “Analytical Evaluation of Five Oral Fluid Drug Testing Devices.” Toxichem Krimtech. Ed. Hans Maurer et al. Vol. 77. Jena, Germany: GTFCh, 2010. 199–199. Print.