Roadside Drug Testing Research Articles

High-throughput liquid chromatography-vacuum differential mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry for the analysis of isomeric drugs of abuse in human urine.

The use of differential mobility spectrometry at low pressure coupled to liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-vDMS-MS) was investigated for the analysis of 13 drugs of abuse (DoA) including the following: cocaine, ecgonine methyl ester, cocaethylene, benzoylecgonine, norcocaine, tramadol, isomeric pairs of metabolites; O-desmethyl-cis-tramadol and N-desmethyl-cis-tramadol, and cannabinoids: Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabidiol, 11-hydroxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, 11-nor-9carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, and 11-nor-9carboxy-Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol glucuronide. Different parameters were optimized for isomeric separation, such as LC mobile phase composition (20%-100% methanol acetonitrile and isopropanol, flow rate: 8-100 μL/min) and DMS separation voltage. Methanol and acetonitrile significantly affected the compensation voltage of the analytes and improved DMS separation. A short trap/elute LC-vDMS-SIM/MS screening method of 1min was developed to quantify 11 drugs of abuse (except THC/CBD), in addition to a 4-min LC-vDMS-SIM/MS method to identify and quantify five cannabinoids including the isomers THC/CBD and three THC metabolites. THC is the principal psychoactive constituent of cannabis and is a controlled substance in comparison to its isomeric counterpart CBD; this highlights the importance and challenges to resolve these isomeric pairs by analytical techniques. The signal responses were linear over a concentration range of 0.005-10μg/mL for the DoA and 1-1000 ng/mL for cannabinoids. The intraday and interday precision were better than 12.2% and accuracy better than 115%. Urine samples from subjects who tested positive for THC and/or cocaine during roadside drug testing were evaluated to assess the performance of the methods LC-vDMS-SIM/MS and LC-MRM/MS. Results show that the developed LC-vDMS-SIM/MS method presents similar performance to LC-MRM/MS with improved sample throughput.

How do perceptions of procedural justice, police legitimacy, and legitimacy of laws influence intentions to drug drive?

Introduction: There is a need for improved drug driving enforcement to promote greater driver compliance with drug driving laws. In Australia, Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) suffers from operational challenges that undermine its effectiveness in reducing drug driving. Objective: To identify potential improvements to RDT, this study investigated the extent to which drivers perceive RDT to be procedurally just and that the policing of drug driving and the associated laws are legitimate. These perceptions were then compared with those applying to Random Breath Testing (RBT) and examined in relation to their respective influence on intentions to drug and drink drive in the future. Method: A sample of 1,483 licensed drivers from three Australian states completed an online survey. Results: Those participants who reported engaging in drug driving perceived RDT to be less procedurally just than non-drug drivers. Similarly, drug drivers perceived the police and associated drug driving laws to be less legitimate than non-drug drivers. Furthermore, drug drivers who had been tested at an RDT operation in the past perceived RDT to be less procedurally just and considered drug driving policing and laws to be less legitimate, compared with the corresponding perceptions of drink drivers who had been tested at an RBT operation. A regression analysis indicated that stronger intentions to drug drive in the future were associated with lower perceptions of police legitimacy and the legitimacy of drug driving laws, but not with the elements of procedural justice. However, follow-up analyses indicated that the influence of procedural justice on intentions was mediated by the two legitimacy variables, thus weakening its direct impact on intentions. Practical applications: The results highlight the need for road safety authorities to enhance the perceived legitimacy of drug driving enforcement and associated laws. Changes to current police practices and/or drug-driving laws may also be needed to enhance the effectiveness of RDT.

Finding the Police Before the Police Find Them? Investigating How and Why Motorists Use Facebook for Knowledge of Roadside Drug Testing Locations

Facebook groups and pages exist that expose the locations of roadside drug testing, potentially undermining police enforcement and enabling punishment avoidance. This study aimed to understand how and why these sites are used, with a focus on Queensland motorists who reported using illicit drugs and/or medical cannabis and used Facebook police location communities. Interviews with 30 participants were conducted. A thematic analysis revealed that participants used police location communities to avoid receiving a charge for driving under the influence of drugs. Upon observation of a relevant roadside drug-testing location on police location communities, participants reported (a) delaying their driving and/or (b) circumventing the operation. Avoidance of roadside drug-testing locations appeared driven by the perception that laws for driving under the influence of drugs were unfair and that a charge for driving under the influence of drugs would negatively impact their life. The findings provide important knowledge regarding police location communities and have implications for how roadside drug testing could be most effectively operated.

Detection of Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in oral fluid using two point-of-collection testing devices following oral administration of a THC and cannabidiolcontaining oil.

Point-of-collection testing (POCT) devices are widely used in roadside and workplace drug testing to identify recent cannabis use by measuring the presence of Δ9 -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in oral fluid (OF). However, the performance of POCT devices with oral medicinal cannabis products remains poorly described. In a randomised, double-blinded, crossover trial, adults with insomnia disorder (n= 20) received a single (2mL) oral dose of oil containing 10mg THC + 200 mg cannabidiol, or placebo, prior to sleep. Participants were tested with the Securetec DrugWipe® 5S (10ng/mL THC cut-off) and Dräger DrugTest® 5000 (25 ng/mL THC cut-off) POCT devices at baseline (pre-treatment) and then at 0.5, 10, and 18 h post-treatment. An OF sample, taken at each time point, was also analysed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Large individual variability in OF THC concentrations was observed 0.5h post-treatment (range: 0-425 ng/mL; mean (SD) 48.7(107.5)ng/mL). Both the Securetec DrugWipe® 5S and DrugTest® 5000 demonstrated poor sensitivity to THC at 0.5h post-treatment (25% and 50%, respectively). At 10 and 18 h post-treatment, all participant OF THC concentrations were below screening cut-offs, and all test results were negative. These findings highlight the relatively poor sensitivity of both devices in detecting recent use of an oral medicinal cannabis product. They also suggest a low probability of obtaining a positive THC result the morning after ('one-off') use. Further research is required to establish the probability of obtaining a positive THC result with regular medicinal cannabis use.

Drug driving in Italy. The results of the first roadside drug testing service utilizing on-site confirmatory analysis between 2019 and 2022

BackgroundDrug driving represents a public safety concern, and the size of this issue in Italy is not fully known. Drug testing is composed of two steps: 1) screening and 2) confirmatory analysis. The second step, and the associate medical examination to assess the state of impairment, usually are not performed right after the screening as they require specialized personnel and instrumental equipment that are not historically available at roadblocks. These pitfalls make this process both complicated and time-consuming. MethodsA mobile laboratory was set up in 2019 by the Forensic Lab Service S.r.l. (limited liability company) to improve roadblock timing, planning, as well as to shed light on the extent of the drug driving issue in Italy. Drug screenings were performed using DrugWipe® Saliva testing. Confirmatory analysis was performed on oral fluids by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. A dedicated room of the mobile laboratory was also designed for drug driving medical assessment. Result2082 samples were collected during 88 road safety services held in different locations across Italy. In total, 9 % of the tested subjects were positive to both the screening and the confirmatory analysis. The most prevalent illicit drugs found in this study were THC (72 %), followed by cocaine (41 %). Drug drivers were mostly male (93 %) and younger than 30 years of age (58 %). ConclusionsThe prevalence of drivers testing positive for illicit drugs resulted to be higher compared to the results obtained in the DRUID project and to other surveys previously performed in Italy. These data demonstrate the need for control services to improve road safety in regards to drug driving.

Drug driving: a secondary analysis of factors associated with driving under the influence of cannabis in Jamaica

ObjectivesTo determine cannabis use patterns, the predictive sociodemographic correlates of driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC) and the association between risk perception and cannabis dependence among vehicle drivers in...

"A glimmer of hope" - Perceptions, barriers, and drivers for medicinal cannabis use amongst Australian and New Zealand people with endometriosis.

Previous quantitative research has shown that cannabis use, mostly illicit, is used for symptom management amongst those with endometriosis living in Australia or New Zealand, but the drivers and barriers for use of legal, medicinal cannabis in this population are currently unclear. This study sought to investigate, via online focus-groups, the perceptions, barriers, drivers, and experiences associated with cannabis use, whether legal or illicit, amongst 37 Australians and New Zealanders, aged 18-55, with a medical diagnosis of endometriosis. Previous cannabis usage was not required to participate. Discussion topics included strategies employed to manage symptoms, exploration of current medications, previous use of cannabis for pain management, and interest in using medicinal cannabis as a management strategy. Participants with moderate to severe symptoms of medically diagnosed endometriosis reported inadequacies with their current medical and self-management strategies and were inclined to try medicinal cannabis, both as part of their medical management and as part of a clinical trial. Barriers to medicinal cannabis adoption identified in this cohort included high costs of legal cannabis products, lack of clarity and fairness in current roadside drug testing laws and workplace drug testing policies, concern over the impact of stigma affecting familial, social and workplace life domains, and subsequent judgement and the lack of education/engagement from their medical providers regarding cannabis use. Given the interest in medicinal cannabis and the reported lack of effective symptom management, clinical trials are urgently required to determine the potential role that medicinal cannabis may play in reducing the symptoms of endometriosis.

Is drug driving more common among those who know where the police are? An investigation into the use and non-use of Facebook police location communities

BackgroundSome individuals who consume drugs have been known to use police avoidance strategies, such as using Facebook police location communities (PLCs). Questions remain unanswered regarding the use of PLCs, including 1) what differentiates those who use these communities from those who do not, and 2) do these communities influence deterrence effects and offending behaviour? MethodsThe current study aimed to answer these questions, with a sample of Queensland motorists who reported consuming either cannabis, methamphetamine, MDMA and/or cocaine in the last 30 days. A total of 640 individuals, ranging in age between 17 and 78 years (M = 41.25, SD = 13.24) (73.4 % male) completed an online survey. ResultsThe use of PLCs for information regarding Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) locations was reported by 34 % of the sample (n = 215). After exposure to relevant RDT posts on PLCs, participants reported more decisions to take a back road (946 instances reported) than decisions to delay driving (473 instances). A logistic regression revealed that when compared to non-PLC users, those using PLCs for RDT information reported greater concern with being caught for drug driving, greater awareness of the drug driving penalty and procedures, and knowing others who also use PLCs to avoid detection for drug driving. ConclusionsThe findings highlight that PLCs may assist motorists to engage in drug driving offences with a reduced risk of detection and have implications for how to operationalise RDT in a way that reduces the harmful effects of these sites.

The self-reported psychosocial and legal factors contributing to drink and drug driving

Drug driving is recognised as a major road safety problem in many countries. In Australia, the primary response to this problem involved the adoption of roadside drug testing (RDT), which was modelled on the policies and practices used to conduct random breath testing (RBT) for alcohol. However, there remain important differences in the way that RDT and RBT are conducted, which might produce differential effects on drug and drink driving behaviour. In addition, various psychosocial factors are known to influence the two behaviours. Thus, there is a need to investigate the relative influence of legal and psychosocial factors on drug driving and explore how they may be similar or different to drink driving. Accordingly, this study utilised Deterrence Theory and Akers' Social Learning Theory, augmented by measures of dependence and a range of psychosocial factors, to examine the factors associated with self-reported drink and drug driving. An online survey was completed by 1394 licensed drivers from the three most populous states in Australia: Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria. Self-reported drink and drug driving became more likely as level of dependence increased. In relation to legal factors, direct experience of avoiding detection was the strongest predictor of self-reported drink and drug driving. Among the psychosocial factors, a significant positive relationship was found between holding favourable attitudes toward both drink driving and drug driving and self-reported behaviours. The findings suggest that applying legal sanctions in isolation without addressing the psychosocial rewards and punishments for the behaviours is not sufficient to reduce drug or drink driving. Future research should identify countermeasures that integrate deterrence and psychosocial principles in order to reduce these risky driving behaviours.

Driving-related behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions among Australian medical cannabis users: results from the CAMS 20 survey

Road safety is an important concern amidst expanding worldwide access to legal cannabis. The present study reports on the driving-related subsection of the Cannabis as Medicine Survey 2020 (CAMS-20) which surveyed driving-related behaviors, attitudes, and perceptions among Australian medical cannabis (MC) users. Of the 1063 respondents who reported driving a motor vehicle in the past 12 months, 28% (297/1063) reported driving under the influence of cannabis (DUIC). Overall, 49–56% of respondents said they typically drive within 6 h of MC use, depending on the route of administration (oral or inhaled). Non-medical cannabis (NMC) was perceived to be more impairing for driving than MC. Binary logistic regression revealed associations between likelihood of DUIC and (1) inhaled routes of cannabis administration, (2) THC-dominant products, (3) illicit rather than prescribed use, (4) believing NMC does not impair driving, and (5) not being deterred by roadside drug testing. Overall, these findings suggest there is a relatively low perception of driving-related risk among MC users. Targeted education programs may be needed to highlight the potential risks associated with DUIC, and further research is needed to determine whether driving performance is differentially affected by MC and NMC.

What contributes to drug driving? An exploratory investigation into the influence of problematic substance use, roadside testing and alternative transport options

Despite a strong reliance on enforcement approaches to prevent drug driving in Australia, this behaviour is still prevalent. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of problematic drug use (i.e., showing indications of addiction), exposure to roadside drug testing, the use of detection avoidance strategies, and perceptions relating to alternative transport options on drug driving among illicit drug users. A total of 1,541 licensed drivers from the states of Queensland, New South Wales, and Victoria completed an online survey. The survey collected demographic and problematic substance use information, as well as items assessing drug driving behaviour. Cannabis was reported to be the most commonly used drug (36.0%); the most common drug of problematic use (27.9%), and the drug most often taken prior to driving (43.5%). Observing police operating Roadside Drug Tests (RDT) was more common among the participants than being tested by RDT (35.7% vs 23%). The results indicated a significant association between being a drug driver and observing or being tested by RDT. The drug drivers were significantly more likely to report using a range of strategies to avoid police detection than the non-drug drivers. Similarly, the drug drivers reported that it was more difficult for them to use various alternative transport options than the non-drug drivers. Decision tree analyses found that significant predictors of self-reported drug driving were problematic drug use, holding a provisional or probationary licence, earning a low- or middle-income, and using detection avoidance strategies like remaining watchful for police vehicles and taking back streets. The findings of this study suggest that ongoing improvements to drug driving enforcement will need to be complemented by health-based approaches designed to reduce drug abuse and dependence, and improvements to public transport, in order to achieve a sustainable reduction in drug driving.

Facebook and drug driving: Does online sharing work against road safety countermeasures?

Introduction: Enhancements to technology have transformed several aspects of road safety, communication, and connectivity. At the intersection of these, scholars have begun to speculate whether certain aspects of technology may provide motorists ways to engage in illegal and dangerous driving behaviors without consequences. Police traffic operations such as Roadside Drug Testing are intended to occur “anywhere, anytime” to communicate to motorists that they should not risk offending. A potential challenge for road safety is the emergence of Facebook police location pages and groups, where users can share the locations of police operations. Method: In this study, the authors examined two Facebook police location groups and three pages from Queensland (Australia) and conducted a content analysis of posts related to Roadside Drug Testing operations and a thematic analysis of comments on these posts. A total of 282 posts related to Roadside Drug Testing were identified between February and April 2021, with 1,823 comments made. Results: The findings suggest that some users: (a) had lived experiences of avoiding punishment for drug driving; (b) remain unaware of how long to wait between drug consumption and driving; (c) perceived Roadside Drug Testing operations to be for the purpose of revenue raising; and (d) changed their driving behavior upon seeing an operation. Conclusions: These findings suggest consideration is needed regarding the responsibility of both Facebook, and the government, in allowing groups and pages to exist that undermine law enforcement. Practical Applications: Regarding practice, the comments suggest that greater education is needed regarding “safe” times to drive after drug taking.

Rapid roadside drug testing in saliva using in vitro tongue

Rapid roadside drug testing in saliva using in vitro tongue

Are Current Drug Driving Enforcement Strategies Achieving the Desired Effect? Drug Users’ Perceptions of Drug Driving Legislation and Enforcement in Queensland

This study examined how illicit drug users perceived roadside drug testing (RDT) in Queensland, a jurisdiction that enforces a zero-tolerance enforcement strategy to drug driving. Fifty-two illicit drug users were interviewed, and thematic analysis was used to identify emerging themes. The results showed that exposure to RDT and apprehension certainty were reportedly low. The targeted regime of RDT had dichotomous implications towards apprehension certainty, due to the familiarity with the testing procedures. Participants also reported mixed experiences with testing accuracy, in that some offenders reported testing negative just following use, while others who reportedly regulated their driving tested positive, despite not having recently used. Next, participants reported engaging in punishment avoidance behaviours that aimed to evade police exposure and suspicion, and to mask the presence of drugs in their saliva. The combination of avoidance behaviours and perceptions of one’s ability to circumnavigate RDT impacted on participants’ apprehension certainty. Due to their experiences, the majority of (cannabis) users agreed that RDT approaches were discriminatory and unjust, due to the zero-tolerance policy, the testing of presence over impairment, and the lack of policing towards other drugs. These perceived limitations were noted to potentially increase user offending in some circumstances and suggested that there may be a dissonance between the intended aim of RDT and the outcome on drug user behaviours. The findings of this study may hold implications for future research in identifying limitations in the current evidence and help inform policing procedures and policy surrounding future drug testing approaches.

Evaluation of an Increase in Roadside Drug Testing in Victoria Based on Models of the Crash Effects of Random and Targeted Roadside Tests

Drug driving continues to be overrepresented in both fatal and serious injury crashes in Victoria. As an enforcement countermeasure, preliminary oral fluid tests to detect drug driving were introduced in Victoria, Australia in December 2004. Recent research has modelled the relationships between prevalences of THC and methamphetamine in fatally and seriously injured drivers and (a) the annual numbers of random and targeted drug tests during 2010-2016 and (b) the positive detection rates from these tests. The increase in roadside drug tests in Victoria from 42,000 in 2013 (1% of licensed drivers) to 100,000 per year (2.2% of drivers), particularly targeted tests, is estimated to have saved 33 fatal crashes (13.7% reduction) and at least 80 serious injury crashes (1.4% reduction) per year. Based on the findings from this research, further increases in targeted and random roadside drug tests are warranted, up to at least 390,100 total tests per year, which are estimated to save a further 46 fatal crashes and at least a further 134 serious injury crashes per year.

Playing to the gallery: the invocation of human rights, legal actors, and outside audiences in debates on roadside drug testing in the Australian Capital Territory

ABSTRACT Roadside drug testing (‘RDT’) was introduced in the Australian Capital Territory (‘ACT’) through a private member’s Bill that was fiercely debated in the ACT parliament. It was the first RDT scheme in Australia subject to human rights scrutiny, and thus parliamentarians had to weigh road safety arguments against human rights considerations in determining whether the proposed measures were proportionate. This paper focuses on the debate over RDT in the ACT parliament, how human rights and safety concerns figure, and how legal actors and ‘outside audiences’ are invoked. The debate was marked by frequent appeals to family members present in the public gallery and legal actors such as the Chief Police Officer, the Human Rights Commissioner, and socio-legal experts outside the chamber. Drawing from cultural legal studies scholarship on legal insiders and outside audiences in legal proceedings, this paper analyses how these stakeholders figure in human rights debates on RDT, and with what effects. The paper argues that the invocation of outside audiences reflects what Crawley and Tranter term ‘a need to bring the human back’ but cautions that this humanising process only brings some humans in, and therefore connects human rights to only certain human lives in certain ways.

A study into the nature and extent of drug driving recidivism in Queensland (Australia)

Introduction: While research has reported on overall prevalence rates of drug driving, the extent of recidivist offending has yet to be explored. The objective of this research was to examine recidivistic behaviors detected through Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) in Queensland (between December 2007 and June 2020), with a focus on: Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), 3,4-Methylenedioxymethylamphetamine (MDMA), and methamphetamine (MA). Method: Data were provided by the Queensland Police Service, and contained information on positive drug detections that were confirmed via laboratory analysis. Results: The analyses revealed 50,442 unique offenders with a total of 67,727 offenses, as 25% (N = 12,490) of all offenders had been apprehended more than once (ranging from 2 to 11 offences). MA use was more common among recidivist offenders, whereas THC was more common for those with one offense. On average, the days between offenses decreased with increases in offense number. Conclusions: The findings provide evidence for the extent of drug driving recidivism on Queensland roads. Practical applicationsTo deter recidivists and the greater motorist population from drug driving, there is need for greater resources dedicated to RDT to increase both the perceived and real likelihood of detection.

Is the Unsafe Becoming Undetectable? A Content Analysis of Facebook Sites that Reveal Roadside Drug Testing Locations

Is the Unsafe Becoming Undetectable? A Content Analysis of Facebook Sites that Reveal Roadside Drug Testing Locations

Do they need to be tested to be deterred? Exploring the impact of exposure to roadside drug testing on drug driving

Introduction: Maximizing the deterrent effects of Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) operations remains critical for improving road safety. While preliminary research has explored the impact of being tested at RDT sites, there is yet to be an investigation of different types of exposure (e.g., seeing an operation, being tested) and the subsequent relationship(s) with perceptions of certainty of apprehension and future intentions to offend. The overall objective of this research was to explore these relationships with a sample of drug takers. Method: A total of 803 Queensland motorists aged between 16 and 75 (M = 27.12, SD = 13.09) completed an online-based survey, and all reported consuming marijuana, MDMA, and/or methamphetamine at least once in the previous 12 months. A convenience sampling method was utilized (via Facebook). Results: The drug driving proportion of the sample (58%) reported a total of 30,858 instances of drug driving, or 66 instances on average. Seeing RDT in the previous 12 months (26% of sample) was more common than being tested at RDT (7%). The results indicated that seeing RDT two or more times was related to increased certainty of apprehension (compared to those who had seen it only once or never), although the increase was relatively small. Correlational analyses suggest there were some positive (albeit weak relationships) between exposure to RDT (seen and tested) and past and future offending. However, only three significant predictors of future offending emerged: older age, lower perceptions of apprehension certainty, and greater use of marijuana. Practical Applications: The results illuminate the extent of the drug driving problem and the need for greater resourcing to increase the real threat of detection. While the effect of exposure to enforcement was small, it was positive, incremental and supportive of increased roadside police enforcement as well as further research to quantify such deterrent processes.

Police location pages and groups on Facebook: Does knowing where the police are influence perceptions of certainty and drug driving behaviour?

Motorists can drive past a police roadside operation and share this location to a Facebook police location group or page within seconds. Several of these police location communities (PLCs) exist on Facebook, however the effect of these communities on perceptions of apprehension certainty and offending behaviour(s) remains unknown. This research aimed to explore this further, with a sample of N = 890 Queensland motorists (N = 350 females, N = 532 males) who acknowledged consuming either marijuana, methamphetamine or methyl​enedioxy​methamphetamine in the previous 12 months. One quarter of the sample (N = 219) reported using PLCs, with 94 of these users (43%) reporting using PLCs to avoid Roadside Drug Testing (RDT) (PLC-avoid-RDT). Compared to the police location community (PLC) users who did not use the information to avoid RDT (N = 125), PLC-avoid-RDT users reported a greater level of past offending (75 vs 31 events in past 12 months), demonstrated a greater degree of disordered drug use (M = 16.93 vs 11.82 out of 44), had greater future intentions to offend (“unlikely” to “likely” vs “unlikely” to “very unlikely”), viewed the posts more frequently (few times a week vs a few times a month), and perceived posts to be more accurate and reliable (6.57 vs 5.20 out of 10). This study provides preliminary evidence into the use (and effect) of PLCs among drug takers, and suggests that while these sites are not used by all offenders, a smaller proportion of motorists are using them with the intention of actively avoiding RDT.