TIAFT Young Scientists "Workshop 2001"

Oral Fluid Testing in Road Traffic - The German Experience within the ROSITA Project

S. Steinmeyer, H. Ohr, and M. R. Moeller

Institute of Legal Medicine, Saarland University, 66421 Homburg/Saar, Germany

The German objective of workpackage 4 of the EU project ROSITA was to examine the performance of different drug test systems directly at the roadside, as equipment of the Saarland traffic police and done at traffic controls. In addition to seven different urine test systems, devices for the testing of saliva and/or sweat were also used by the police officers:
Drugwipe® (Securetec GmbH), single tests COC (58 tests performed: 54 visual + 4 electronically read out, no failures), OPI (62 tests performed: 61 visual + 2 electronically read out, no failures), AMP (147 test performed: 137 visual + 10 electronically, no failures), Oral Screen® (Avitar Inc.), 3-panel test CAN-COC-OPI (10 tests performed: thereof 6 failures), ToxiQUICK® (Biomar), 5-panel test CAN-COC-OPI-mAMP-BZO-MTD + single test AMP (1 test performed: thereof 1 failure).

In practice, it quickly appeared that both OralScreen® and ToxiQUICK® are presently not acceptable for the police work. In contrary, the Drugwipe® test system was accepted and can be seen as useful help for the officers, especially in connection with an electronic reader which minimised the permanent problem of unclear results.

The police officers have assessed all the test devices via standardised questionnaires, which in total give a clear overview about advantages and disadvantages, test usability and handling in police routine. The officer's favourite specimen for testing is sweat, followed by saliva, and both matrices are assessed as more practicable for testing than urine. However, due to the short time of experience and to manual and analytical problems (collection methods, dependency of consistence of specimen, reading, not all substances covered), at this point of time the saliva/sweat tests were ranked behind the urine tests by the police officers, although they would prefer to work with these specimens.

The analytical evaluation of the roadside tests was done on basis of the obtained results of serum analysis according to the legal requirements. The statistical parameters for the read-out Drugwipe® tests are: Sensitivity: COC 62,50%, OPI 88,89%, AMP 100%. Specificity: COC 74,29%, OPI 83,78%, AMP 51,06%. Accuracy: COC 72,09%, OPI 85,54%, AMP 80,00%. PPV: COC 35,71%, OPI 72,73%, AMP 75,00%. NPV: COC 89,86%, OPI 93,94%, 100,00%. Unfortunately, there are only a few results for the electronically read-out Drugwipe® tests (due to the late involvement of the reader into the German field study) and for the Oral Screen® and ToxiQUICK®; therefore, in terms of sensitivity, specificity etc., the data do not allow to make any statements.

ABSTRACTS

• Pitfalls associated with the use of a simple sample preparation in the analysis of saliva with LC-ESI-MS/MS.
  K.A. Mortier, K.M. Clauwaert, W.E. Lambert, J.F. Van Bocxlaer, E.G. Van den Eeckhout, C.H. Van Peteghem, and A.P. De Leenheer
   
  
• Oral Fluid Testing in Road Traffic - The German Experience within the ROSITA Project
  S. Steinmeyer, H. Ohr, and M. R. Moeller
   
  
• The use of oral fluid and sweat wipes for the detection of drugs of abuse in impaired drivers
  Nele Samyn, Bart Viaene, Bart Laeremans, Gert De Boeck
   
  
• Detection of Fluoxetine and Norfluoxetine in Saliva
  Fiona M. Wylie and John S. Oliver
   
  
• Measurement of Amphetamines in Biological Samples by LC-MS/MS
  Michelle Wood, Michael Morris, Donald P Cooper
   
  
• Immunochromatographic teststrips for saliva analysis
  Jörg Zimmermann1, Nele Samyn, Maria da Costa, Thomas Wuske, Rainer Polzius, Hans-Jürgen Duchstein1
   
  
• Determination of MDMA ('Ecstasy') in saliva: a controlled study in recreational users
  Monica Navarro, Magi Farré, Simona Pichini, Jordi Ortuño, Pere Nolasc Roset, Ester Menoyo, Jordi Segura, Rafael de la Torre
   
  
• Determination of MDMA ('Ecstasy') in saliva with Drugwipe analytical device: a controlled study in recreational users
  Monica Navarro, Magi Farré, Simona Pichini, Piergiorgio Zuccaro, Roberta Pacifici, Jordi Ortuño, Pere Nolasc Roset, Ester Menoyo, Jordi Segura, Rafael de la Torre
   
  
• Elimination kinetics of oral nandrolone in urine and saliva
  V. Cirimele, P. Kintz B. Ludes
   
  
• Determination of Cocaine and its Metabolites in Saliva by GC/MS-EI
  P. Campora O.; A.M. Bermejo B.; M.J. Tabernero and P. Fernandez.
   
  
• The Finnish experience from the ROSITA project
  Marielle Grönholm and Pirjo Lillsunde