Oral fluid device performance in identifying amphetamine, methamphetamine, and cocaine use in Brazilian drivers

Stimulant use while driving is a high-risk factor for collisions and fatalities. In recent years, several strategies to curtail impaired driving were employed on highways, including on-site oral fluid testing. This study evaluated four roadside oral fluid testing devices (AquilaScan®, Dräger DrugTest®, Druglizer®, and DrugWipe®) for the detection of amphetamine, methamphetamine, and cocaine in oral fluid from Brazilian drivers. Overall, 8985 screening tests were conducted, and LC-MS-MS analysis was performed on 46% of the oral fluid samples. Screening and confirmatory test results were compared considering the manufacturers' and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's recommended cutoff concentrations. Performance reliability data are available for well-known oral fluid screening devices such as the Dräger DrugTest® or Securetec DrugWipe®, but most evaluations were based on highly prevalent cannabinoid results. In many cases, there were insufficient data to evaluate performance of other drug classes, including reliability data for amphetamines and cocaine that are presented here. Approximately, 3.0% of samples screened positive for amphetamine, 0.9% for methamphetamine, and 2.6% for cocaine. Efficiency was higher than 93.9% for all devices, but other parameters varied considerably, with sensitivity 56.4-100% and positive predictive value 4.2-87.1%. When considering the recommended minimum of 80% performance criteria suggested by the Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol, and Medicines study, the Dräger DrugTest® was the only device to achieve satisfactory sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency for these stimulants at multiple evaluated cutoffs. Given the observed variability between devices, a detailed evaluation of the analytical performance of roadside oral fluid testing devices is advised before implementation in traffic enforcement actions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Analytical Toxicology
Published
2025-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bkaf033
Primary Topic
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Oral fluid device performance in identifying amphetamine, methamphetamine, and cocaine use in Brazilian drivers

Marilyn A. Huestis, Mailton Vasconcelos, Ana Carolina Furiozo Arantes, Carolina Silveira Dalanhol et al.
Journal of Analytical Toxicology
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
article

Oral fluid device performance in identifying amphetamine, methamphetamine, and cocaine use in Brazilian drivers

Marilyn A. Huestis, Mailton Vasconcelos, Ana Carolina Furiozo Arantes, Carolina Silveira Dalanhol, Flávio Pechansky, Juliana Nichterwitz Scherer, Bruna Govoni, Gabriela Ramos Borges, Aline Franco Martins, Patrícia Pacheco Viola, Giovanna Cristiano de Gouveia, José Luiz Costa, Bruno Pereira dos Santos
article en

Abstract

Stimulant use while driving is a high-risk factor for collisions and fatalities. In recent years, several strategies to curtail impaired driving were employed on highways, including on-site oral fluid testing. This study evaluated four roadside oral fluid testing devices (AquilaScan®, Dräger DrugTest®, Druglizer®, and DrugWipe®) for the detection of amphetamine, methamphetamine, and cocaine in oral fluid from Brazilian drivers. Overall, 8985 screening tests were conducted, and LC-MS-MS analysis was performed on 46% of the oral fluid samples. Screening and confirmatory test results were compared considering the manufacturers' and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's recommended cutoff concentrations. Performance reliability data are available for well-known oral fluid screening devices such as the Dräger DrugTest® or Securetec DrugWipe®, but most evaluations were based on highly prevalent cannabinoid results. In many cases, there were insufficient data to evaluate performance of other drug classes, including reliability data for amphetamines and cocaine that are presented here. Approximately, 3.0% of samples screened positive for amphetamine, 0.9% for methamphetamine, and 2.6% for cocaine. Efficiency was higher than 93.9% for all devices, but other parameters varied considerably, with sensitivity 56.4-100% and positive predictive value 4.2-87.1%. When considering the recommended minimum of 80% performance criteria suggested by the Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol, and Medicines study, the Dräger DrugTest® was the only device to achieve satisfactory sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency for these stimulants at multiple evaluated cutoffs. Given the observed variability between devices, a detailed evaluation of the analytical performance of roadside oral fluid testing devices is advised before implementation in traffic enforcement actions.

Journal of Analytical ToxicologyVol. 49(7)
Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (BR), Thomas Jefferson University (US), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR), Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (BR), Centro de Estudos e Pesquisa em Saúde Coletiva (BR), University of Health Sciences (SO), Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos (BR), University of Health Sciences Antigua (AG)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.