Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
6551110 | Forensic Science International | 2018 | 8 Pages |
Abstract
Results showed that the overall specificity and accuracy were satisfactory and met the DRUID standard of >80% for all 3 devices. Ora-Check® had poor sensitivities (ketamine 36%, methamphetamine 63%, opiates 53%, cocaine 60%, THC 0%). DrugWipe® 6S showed good sensitivities in the methamphetamine (83%) and opiates (93%) tests but performed relatively poorly for ketamine (41%), cocaine (43%) and THC (22%). SalivaScreen® also demonstrated good sensitivities in the methamphetamine (83%) and opiates (100%) tests, and had the highest sensitivity for ketamine (76%) and cocaine (71%); however, it failed to detect any of the 28 THC-positive cases. The test completion rate (proportion of tests completed with quality control passed) were: 52% (Ora-Check®), 78% (SalivaScreen®) and 99% (DrugWipe® 6S).
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Authors
Magdalene H.Y. Tang, C.K. Ching, Simon Poon, Suzanne S.S. Chan, W.Y. Ng, M. Lam, C.K. Wong, Ronnie Pao, Angus Lau, Tony W.L. Mak,