2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2014.02.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance evaluation of on-site oral fluid drug screening devices in normal police procedure in Germany

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
55
0
2

Year Published

2015
2015
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
1
55
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The sensitivity and specificity values for THC, cocaine, methamphetamine and opioids were within the "high" (0.800-0.899) to "very high" (0.900-0.999) range according to the designations used in the DRUID project [4] and were comparable to values of the best performing devices in other recent studies [5][6][7][8][9]. These results indicate that the devices were able to correctly detect the drug/drug category when the drug/drug category was present and to correctly indicate the absence of a drug/drug category when none was present.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The sensitivity and specificity values for THC, cocaine, methamphetamine and opioids were within the "high" (0.800-0.899) to "very high" (0.900-0.999) range according to the designations used in the DRUID project [4] and were comparable to values of the best performing devices in other recent studies [5][6][7][8][9]. These results indicate that the devices were able to correctly detect the drug/drug category when the drug/drug category was present and to correctly indicate the absence of a drug/drug category when none was present.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 74%
“…Most notable is the state of Victoria in Australia, which operates a high visibility program of random drug testing using oral fluid screening [6]. Initial observations suggest that this program has increased the perceived probability of detection as a result of a high level of awareness, which has consequently resulted in considerable behaviour change.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some of the devices that have been evaluated in peerreviewed journals within the last few years include the Cozart ® DDS, Dräger DrugTest ® 5000, RapidSTAT ® , DrugWipe ® 5 + , OraLab ® 6, OrAlert ™ and OraTect ® III (Table 1) [59][60][61][62][63]. All the currently available devices target the parent compound THC, though many have recorded cross-reactivity with 11-OH-THC and THC-COOH.…”
Section: Screening Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cozart ® DDS Alere 31 [59,61] Dräger DrugTest ® 5000 Dräger Safety 5 [59][60][61][62][63] RapidSTAT ® Mavand 15 [59][60][61][62] DrugWipe ® 5 + Securetec 30 [59][60][61][62] OraLab ® 6 Varian 50 [59] OrAlert ™ Innovacon 100 [59] OraTect ® III Branan 40 [59] ELISA kit Immunalysis 4 [64,65] glands or by deposition of external contaminants [76]. This matrix is most useful for estimating the approximate time and duration of past events as the growth rate of the hair and distance of the hair section from the scalp can provide this type of information.…”
Section: Test Devicementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of oral fluid for diagnostic purposes is increasing; it can be used for the diagnosis of several diseases [1,2], to monitor exposure to chemicals [3,4], monitor therapeutic use of some drugs [5,6], and to detect recent use of illicit drugs [7][8][9]. On-site screening devices based on immunological methods are available for rapid screening of drugs in oral fluid [10,11], and positive findings are often used as reason for taking blood samples for quantification of drugs, particularly from drivers suspected for driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%