Dane County Oral Fluid Pilot Project- Establishing an Oral Fluid Drug Testing Program in Alabama

Transcription

1 Dane County Oral Fluid Pilot Project- Establishing an Oral Fluid Drug Testing Program in Alabama Curt Harper, Ph.D., F-ABFT Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences Candace Lightner, Founder and President We Save Lives Ted Savage, Forensic Toxicologist Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, Forensic Toxicology Section

2

3 Dane County Oral Fluid Project Ted Savage Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene Madison, Wi

4 Overview Project design Screen comparison Extent of drugged driving Other areas to investigate DRE case studies

5 Project Design Collect 100 paired OF and blood specimen Match and deidentify paired specimen Determine utility of OF detection device Complete full drug testing on samples with BAC>0.100 g/100ml Extent of drugged driving esp. at high BACs

6 Positive Drug Screening Results: 50 Oral Fluid vs. Blood Oral Fluid Blood THC COC OP BZ MAMP AMP

7 OF Compared to Blood Analyte Sensitivity Specificity Positive Predictive Value Negative Predictive Value Accuracy THC 88% 87% 83% 91% 88% Cocaine 100% 99% 86% 100% 99% Amphetamine 100% 88% 14% 100% 88% Methamphetamine N/A 99% 0% 100% 99% Opiates 83% 99% 83% 99% 98% Benzodiazepines 45% 99% 83% 94% 93% All Drug Categories 82% 96% 70% 98% 94%

8 Phase I Results 104 valid oral fluid collections 24 arrests between 10:00 am-6:00 pm 57 of subjects + OF result in at least 1 category 17 subjects + OF in 2 or more categories Consistent correlation between OF and Blood results 94% accuracy through all drug categories 76 of 104 subjects with alcohol 73 with BAC greater than g/100ml

9 70 Total Blood Positive Vs. BAC No Drugs Present in Blood Drugs Present in Blood ND >0.251

10 Phase II Results 116 specimens selected with BAC > 0.100g/100mL 17 (15%) subjects between 10:00am-6:00pm 83 (72%) subjects between 10:00pm-6:00am 81 (70%) subjects positive for 1 or more drug category 60 subjects (52%) positive for THC 10 subjects (9%) positive for cocaine

11 What Else? On the roadside testing Compare correlation with potential time lapse Compare with quantified results More DRE paired data Push for partnerships from the start Help segue the future use and case law

12 DRE Case #1 Driver with right of way stopped not turning Eventually pulled into and parked in a lot Strong odor of THC Indicated smoking within an hour prior Eyelid tremors and leg tremors Slightly fast internal clock Not knowing doesn t make it legal!

13 Two vehicle crash DRE Case #2 Admission of heroin use Paraphernalia in vehicle Initial observations slow and unsteady Progressively more and more sleepy until unable to coherently answer questions Narcotic Analgesic called Morphine, Codeine, Methadone, BE, Clonaz, Diaz, Nordiaz, Oxaz

14 DRE Case #3 Responding to crash as a second crash occurred on scene Subject moving things in vehicle Admits to having THC on person 2 Lines of cocaine 2 days prior Stim and Dep OF +THC & +Coc Only THC in Blood

15 DRE Case #4 Single vehicle lodged up against house after knocking over utility pole Heading southbound away from stated destination Confused and repetitive questions How do I estimate the passage of 30 seconds? Walked backwards WAT A lot more than THC at party, but I didn t MDMA and Alprazolam detected

16 DRE Case #5 Individual called in for reckless driving DRE requested at hospital Observations of subject Packets of synthetic marijuana in car DRE calls cannabis ND by evidentiary and OF Send-out detected 3 synthetic cannabinoids Officer s experience and observations!

17 Contact Information Thank you!! Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene UW-Madison, School of Medicine and Public Health 2601 Agriculture Drive Madison, WI WISCONSIN STATE LABORATORY OF HYGIENE - TOXICOLOGY SECTION