Wennberg Erica, Windle Sarah B, Filion Kristian B, Thombs Brett D, Gore Genevieve, Benedetti Andrea, Grad Roland, Ells Carolyn, Eisenberg Mark J
Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital/McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Heliyon. 2023 Mar 22;9(4):e14630. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14630. eCollection 2023 Apr.
As more countries legalize recreational cannabis, roadside screening programs are imperative to detect and deter driving under the influence of cannabis. This systematic review evaluated roadside screening tests for cannabis use. We searched six databases (inception-March 2020) and grey literature sources for primary studies evaluating test characteristics of roadside screening tests for cannabis use compared to laboratory tests for cannabinoids in blood or oral fluid. The synthesis was focused on sensitivity and specificity of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) detection. 101 studies were included. Oral fluid tests were higher in specificity and lower in sensitivity compared to urine tests when evaluated against blood laboratory tests. Oral fluid tests were higher in sensitivity and similar in specificity compared to observational tests when evaluated against blood and oral fluid laboratory tests. Sensitivity was variable among oral fluid tests; two instrumented immunoassays (Draeger DrugTest 5000 [5 ng/mL THC cut-off] and Alere DDS 2 Mobile Test System) appeared to perform best, but definitive conclusions could not be drawn due to imprecise estimates. Specificities were similar. Overall, oral fluid tests showed the most promise for use in roadside screening for blood THC levels over legal limits; their continued development and testing are warranted. Urine tests are generally inadvisable, and observational tests require sensitivity improvements.
随着越来越多的国家将消遣性大麻合法化,路边筛查计划对于检测和阻止在大麻影响下驾驶至关重要。本系统评价评估了用于检测大麻使用情况的路边筛查试验。我们检索了六个数据库(建库至2020年3月)和灰色文献来源,以查找与血液或口腔液中大麻素的实验室检测相比,评估大麻使用路边筛查试验检测特征的原始研究。综合分析聚焦于Δ⁹-四氢大麻酚(THC)检测的敏感性和特异性。纳入了101项研究。与尿液检测相比,当与血液实验室检测进行对照评估时,口腔液检测的特异性更高,敏感性更低。当与血液和口腔液实验室检测进行对照评估时,与观察性检测相比,口腔液检测的敏感性更高,特异性相似。口腔液检测之间的敏感性存在差异;两种仪器免疫测定法(德尔格DrugTest 5000 [THC临界值为5 ng/mL]和雅培DDS 2移动检测系统)似乎表现最佳,但由于估计不精确,无法得出明确结论。特异性相似。总体而言,口腔液检测在路边筛查血液中THC水平超过法定限值方面显示出最有前景的应用;有必要对其进行持续开发和测试。尿液检测通常不可取,观察性检测需要提高敏感性。