Examination of Firearms Review: 2007 to 2010 - Interpol

equired for immediate administrative measures. With recent progress in
performance of the point-of-collection testing device performance, controlled
drug administration studies, immunoassay and chromatographic methods, and
collection devices, there is no doubt that oral fluid has an increasingly
important role in testing for suspected DUID drivers [27]. In 2009, modification
of the Traffic Act in Belgium was made to allow for random oral fluid drug
testing and analysis of oral fluid samples for evidence of DUID (comparable to
the Australian situation) [28]. Analytical techniques for detection of drugs in
oral fluid have been reviewed with emphasis on applications used in European
Union (EU) roadside testing projects [29]. Various on-site oral testing devices
were evaluated [30,31,32,33]. While good results were found for amphetamine
(Drugwipe, Oralab6), cocaine (OraLab, Dräger), and opiates (OraLab,
Oralab6), improvements are still needed regarding the detection of cannabis
and benzodiazepines. Efforts have been made to look for reliable devices for
the detection of THC in oral fluid. 25 subjects, 5 free and 20 addicts from a
heroin detoxification center with time of cannabis last smoked recorded, were
used to evaluate the Cozart DDSV to detect cannabis in oral fluid. The 5
drug-free subjects were negative for cannabis; however, the device could only
detect 8 positive subjects (with THC concentrations in the buffer in the range
15-219 ng/mL) [34]. In a more recent evaluation of three devices, namely
Drugwipe-5(+), RapidSTAT and Drug Test 5000, these devices were concluded
to be able to detect about 70% of all cocaine and cannabis users in a roadside
setting. Moreover, with the lowering of the cutoff for THC for the new Drug Test
5000 (i.e., 5 ng/mL), a sensitivity of 93% was reported [35].
In 2006-2008, 13 oral fluid screening devices for drugs of abuse were
evaluated in operational police practice by 11 teams from 6 EU member states,
as part of a work package of the EU funded integrated project “Driving under
the Influence of Drugs, Alcohol and Medicines” (DRUID) [28]. The 13
screening devices selected for the ROSITA II project were evaluated for
operational aspects in two phases. At the end of the evaluation of over 2950
tests, a total of 7 devices were considered to be promising (from a practical
police perspective) for use during daily traffic law enforcement activities, and a
set of Police Users Requirements and Specifications has been developed.
Similarly, 8 on-site oral fluid drug screening devices were evaluated for their
analytical performance in another DRUID project performed in Belgium,
Finland, and Denmark. However, this latter evaluation concluded that none of
the tests reached the target value of 80% for sensitivity, specificity, and
618