Detection of drugs of abuse in simultaneously collected oral fluid, urine and blood from Norwegian drug drivers

• Published in: Forensic science international Vol. 219; no. 1; pp. 165 - 171
• Main Authors: Vindenes, V, Lund, H.M.E, Andresen, W, Gjerde, H, Ikdahl, S.E, Christophersen, A.S, Øiestad, E.L
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ireland Ltd 10-06-2012; Elsevier; Elsevier Sequoia S.A; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Automobile drivers; Automobile Driving - legislation & jurisprudence; Benzodiazepines - analysis; Biological and medical sciences; Blood; Chromatography; Chromatography, Liquid; Driving under the influence; Drug abuse; Drug-impaired driving; Drugs; Fluid dynamics; Fluid flow; Fluids; Forensic hematology; Forensic medicine; Forensic science; Forensic sciences; Forensic Toxicology; General aspects; Humans; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects); LC–MS/MS; Mass Spectrometry; Medical sciences; Methods; Morphine; Narcotics - analysis; Nightclubs; Norway; Oral fluid; Pathology; Public health; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Saliva - chemistry; Studies; Substance Abuse Detection - methods; Substance-Related Disorders - blood; Substance-Related Disorders - urine; Urinalysis; Urine; Norway; Europe; Drugs; Oral fluid; LC–MS/MS; Driving under the influence; Drug; Urine; Biological fluid; Forensic science; Legal medicine; Forensic aspect; Liquid chromatography; Blood; Vehicle driver; LC-MS/MS; Mass spectrometry MS/MS; Drug of abuse; Diagnosis; Detection; Saliva
• ISSN: 0379-0738; 1872-6283
• DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2012.01.001

Abstract Blood and urine samples are collected when the Norwegian police apprehend a person suspected of driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. Impairment is judged from the findings in blood. In our routine samples, urine is analysed if morphine is detected in blood to differentiate between ingestion of heroin, morphine or codeine and also in cases where the amount of blood is too low to perform both screening and quantification analysis. In several cases, the collection of urine might be time consuming and challenging. The aim of this study was to investigate if drugs detected in blood were found in oral fluid and if interpretation of opiate findings in oral fluid is as conclusive as in urine. Blood, urine and oral fluid samples were collected from 100 drivers suspected of drugged driving. Oral fluid and blood were screened using LC–MS/MS methods and urine by immunological methods. Positive findings in blood and urine were confirmed with chromatographic methods. The analytical method for oral fluid included 25 of the most commonly abused drugs in Norway and some metabolites. The analysis showed a good correlation between the findings in urine and oral fluid for amphetamines, cocaine/benzoylecgonine, methadone, opiates, zopiclone and benzodiazepines including the 7-amino-benzodiazepines. Cocaine and the heroin marker 6-monoacetylmorphine (6-MAM) were more frequently detected in oral fluid than in urine. Drug concentrations above the cut-off values were found in both samples of oral fluid and urine in 15 of 22 cases positive for morphine, in 18 of 20 cases positive for codeine and in 19 of 26 cases positive for 6-MAM. The use of cannabis was confirmed by detecting THC in oral fluid and THC-COOH in urine. In 34 of 46 cases the use of cannabis was confirmed both in oral fluid and urine. The use of cannabis was confirmed by a positive finding in only urine in 11 cases and in only oral fluid in one case. All the drug groups detected in blood were also found in oral fluid. Since all relevant drugs detected in blood were possible to find in oral fluid and the interpretation of the opiate findings in oral fluid was more conclusive than in urine, oral fluid might replace urine in driving under the influence cases. The fast and easy sampling is time saving and less intrusive for the drivers.