Suppr超能文献

未能检测到大麻引起的驾驶障碍:模拟驾驶研究的结果。

The failings of limits to detect cannabis-induced driving impairment: Results from a simulated driving study.

机构信息

Lambert Initiative for Cannabinoid Therapeutics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

出版信息

Traffic Inj Prev. 2021;22(2):102-107. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2020.1851685. Epub 2021 Feb 5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Many jurisdictions use limits to define cannabis-impaired driving. Previous studies, however, suggest that THC concentrations in biological matrices do not reliably reflect cannabis dose and are poorly correlated with magnitude of driving impairment. Here, we first review a range of concerns associated with limits for THC. We then use data from a recent clinical trial to test the validity of a range of extant blood and oral fluid THC limits in predicting driving impairment during a simulated driving task.

METHODS

Simulated driving performance was assessed in 14 infrequent cannabis users at two timepoints (30 min and 3.5 h) under three different conditions, namely controlled vaporization of 125 mg (i) THC-dominant (11% THC; <1% CBD), (ii) THC/CBD equivalent (11% THC; 11% CBD), and (iii) placebo (<1% THC & CBD) cannabis. Plasma and oral fluid samples were collected before each driving assessment. We examined whether limits of 1.4 and 7 ng/mL THC in plasma (meant to approximate 1 and 5 ng/mL whole blood) and 2 and 5 ng/mL THC in oral fluid reliably predicted impairment (defined as an increase in standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP) of >2 cm relative to placebo).

RESULTS

For all participants, plasma and oral fluid THC concentrations were over the limits used 30 min after vaporizing THC-dominant or THC/CBD equivalent cannabis. However, 46% of participants failed to meet SDLP criteria for driving impairment. At 3.5 h post-vaporization, 57% of participants showed impairment, despite having low concentrations of THC in both blood (median = 1.0 ng/mL) and oral fluid (median = 1.0 ng/mL). We highlight two individual cases illustrating how (i) impairment can be minimal in the presence of a positive THC result, and (ii) impairment can be profound in the presence of a negative THC result.

CONCLUSIONS

There appears to be a poor and inconsistent relationship between magnitude of impairment and THC concentrations in biological samples, meaning that limits cannot reliably discriminate between impaired from unimpaired drivers. There is a pressing need to develop improved methods of detecting cannabis intoxication and impairment.

摘要

目的

许多司法管辖区使用限制来定义大麻驾驶障碍。然而,先前的研究表明,生物基质中的 THC 浓度不能可靠地反映大麻剂量,并且与驾驶障碍的严重程度相关性较差。在这里,我们首先回顾与 THC 限制相关的一系列问题。然后,我们使用最近的临床试验数据来测试一系列现有的血液和口服液 THC 限制在预测模拟驾驶任务中的驾驶障碍时的有效性。

方法

在三个不同条件下,即在两个时间点(30 分钟和 3.5 小时),在 14 名不常使用大麻的使用者中评估模拟驾驶性能,分别为:(i)125mg (11% THC;<1% CBD)的 THC 优势(11% THC;11% CBD),(ii) THC/CBD 等效(11% THC;11% CBD)和(iii)(<1% THC 和 CBD)大麻的安慰剂。在每次驾驶评估之前采集血浆和口服液样本。我们检查了 1.4 和 7ng/ml 血浆 THC (旨在近似 1 和 5ng/ml 全血)和 2 和 5ng/ml 口服液 THC 的限制是否可靠地预测了损伤(定义为相对于安慰剂,侧向位置标准差(SDLP)增加>2cm)。

结果

对于所有参与者,在蒸气化 THC 优势或 THC/CBD 等效大麻后 30 分钟,血浆和口服液 THC 浓度超过了使用的限制。然而,46%的参与者未能达到 SDLP 驾驶障碍标准。在蒸气化后 3.5 小时,尽管血液(中位数=1.0ng/ml)和口服液(中位数=1.0ng/ml)中的 THC 浓度均较低,但 57%的参与者表现出损伤。我们强调了两个个体案例,说明了(i)在存在阳性 THC 结果的情况下,损伤可能很小,以及(ii)在存在阴性 THC 结果的情况下,损伤可能很深。

结论

损伤的严重程度与生物样本中的 THC 浓度之间似乎存在不良且不一致的关系,这意味着限制不能可靠地区分受损和未受损的驾驶员。迫切需要开发改进的检测大麻中毒和损伤的方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验