Transcript Towards the introduction of Roadside Chemical Drug

Towards the introduction of
Roadside Chemical Drug Testing in
the Republic of Ireland
Dr. Richie Maguire, MBRS
Medical Bureau of Road Safety
• Statutory body established by the Minister for Local Government
under part V of the Road Traffic Act, 1968.
• Responsible for chemical testing of intoxicants in drivers within the
Republic of Ireland
• Responsible for the approval, supply and testing of items used for
indicating the presence and/or concentration of intoxicants
• The Medical Bureau for Road Safety utilises premises and staff
provided under an agreement with University College Dublin
Today's Presentation
• Road Safety Strategy – Drug Driving
• Roadside Drug Testing Report
• Implementation
• Post Implementation
Road Safety Strategy 2007-2012
• Action 123: Introduction of Road Traffic
Impairment Testing
– 5 Psychomotor Tests
– Curriculum and Training by School of Medicine,
UCD and MBRS
• Legislation finalised 2014
Road Safety Strategy 2013-2020
‘Enforcement measures will have a particular
emphasis on safety offences like speeding,
mobile phone use and drink and drug driving.
Every effort will be made to detect and
prosecute for drug driving’.
Minister Varadker 2013
Road Safety Strategy 2013-2020
• Action 77: Legislate for the introduction of
zero tolerance approach for illicit drug driving
and impairment approach for other drugs.
• Action 78: Legislate for the implementation of
chemical roadside testing for drugs.
Roadside Chemical Drug Testing
• Roadside Chemical Drug Testing Report
– January, 2012 DTTAS requested the MBRS
undertake a study on Roadside Drug Testing.
– Completed in June 2012 and available at
http://www.ucd.ie/mbrs/publications/
Roadside Drug Testing Report
• Prevalence; National and
International
• Previous Studies on
Roadside Drug Testing
• Practices in Other
Countries
• Review of Selected
Roadside Testing Devices
• Options available
• Implementation
Prevalence
Prevalence (%) Drug Class versus Year
70
60
2000/01
50
2007
40
2008
2009
30
2010
2011
20
2012
10
0
Cann
Amp
Mamp
Coc
Opia
Mtd
Benz
Evidence of Polydrug Use 2008-2012
No. of Specimens versus No. of Drug Classes
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
1 class
2 classes
3 classes
4 classes
5 classes
6 classes
7 classes
RCDT Targets
• Cannabis
• Benzodiazepines
• Opiates
• Cocaine
Previous Studies
• ROSITA 1 (1999-2000)
• ROSITA 2 (2003-2006)
• DRUID (2006-2011)
– ESTHER
Previous Studies
• Druid projects found that no device available could meet
the requirements set out for all drugs;
– Sensitivity
– Specificity
– Accuracy
>80%
>80%
>85%
• Drager Drugtest 5000 did meet this specification for
Cannabis
• Device used should consider expected types of drugs
• Choose a device that has the best overall performance
Practices in other countries
MBRS reviewed practices in 13 different countries
Using RCDT
• Australia
• Belgium
• Finland
• France
• Germany
• Norway
• Denmark
• Switzerland
Not using RCDT
• Canada
• New Zealand
• Sweden
• USA
• UK
• Republic of Ireland
Practices in other countries
• Different approaches to legislation
–
–
–
–
impairment
zero tolerance
per se
combinations
• Types of devices used varied
• Drugs tested varied
• Specimen Type for confirmation varied
Review of Selected Roadside Testing
Devices (2012 Report)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Operation
Use in other jurisdictions for RCDT
Collection time
Need for a reader/analyser
Range of drugs available
Cut-offs
Storage and Operating Conditions
Cost
Review of Selected Roadside Testing
Devices (2012 Report)
•
•
•
•
•
All immunoassay based
Securetec Drugwipe
Draeger Drugtest 5000
Alere DDS2
Mavand Rapistat
Review of Selected Roadside Testing
Devices (2012 Report)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Operation
Use in other jurisdictions for RCDT
Collection time
Need for a reader/analyser
Range of drugs available
Cut-offs
Storage and Operating Conditions
Cost
Options
• Chemical Testing at the Roadside and RTIT (RCDT
for target drugs and RTIT for others)
• Allow Random Mandatory Intoxicant Test (drugs
and alcohol)
• Disadvantage is the additional time that would
be required at the roadside and the cost of
testing
Implementation
• 2013: Legislation Implementation group comprised of;
– MBRS
– An Garda Siochana
– DTTAS
• 2013: RCDT Implementation group comprised of;
– MBRS
– An Garda Siochana
– DTTAS
• Timeframe is 2 years for implementation
RCDT Implementation Group
• Develop specification
• Review existing specifications
– Home Office Guide to Type for Preliminary Drug
Testing Devices
– Belgian, Norwegian and French tenders
• Review practice in other countries
• Finalise specification
Procurement Timeline
Finalise
Specification (Jul
2014)
Publish
Tender (Aug
2014)
Evaluation
(Oct 2014 May 2015)
Device
Selection
(June 2015)
3 Pre-requisites
• Oral fluid based
• In use for RCDT in another Country
• Scientifically Valid
98 Specifications (2014 Tender)
Criteria (& Sub-Criteria in
italics)
Ultimate Cost
End User Fitness for Purpose
Max
Criteria
Score
Sub
Criteria
Score
% Weighting (No
Reader/Analyser)
% Weighting with
Reader/Analyser
--
--
20
20
20
16
50
40
N/A
16
10
8
100
100
100
Field Trial
Health and Safety
80
20
Technical Requirements
Quality Standards
Analytical Performance
Specimen Collection
Test Requirements
Packaging
405
Reader/Analyser*
245
20
260
45
50
30
General Reader Requirements
145
Physical Interference and
Disturbance
Software
Reader Service
25
25
50
Service and Support
Technical Support
Forensic and Legal Support
Supply Requirements
Training and Familiarisation
55
TOTAL ACHIEVABLE SCORE
805
10
5
15
25
805
RCDT Scientific Evaluation
• Validate Analytical methods GC-MS-MS and
LC-MS-MS (3-6 months)
• Collection of Oral Fluid for testing
• Preparation and verification of control
material to test devices
• Analytical Performance (sensitivity, specificity,
accuracy etc.)
RCDT Field Trial
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Device Storage (size and weight)
Test preparation (ease and time)
Specimen Collection (time, indicator)
Conduct of test (time etc.)
Reader/Analyser (ease of use etc.)
Donor experience
Collector experience
Goal was to conduct in Feb/Mar
Completed in March 2015
RCDT Field Trial
•
•
•
•
•
•
Spent 1 hour training participants
Introduction to the MBRS
Introduction to drugs under test
Use of Oral Fluid as a test specimen
Overview of each system to be evaluated
Demonstration of each system
RCDT Field Trial
•
•
•
•
•
•
1 hour training
Daylight Testing
Break
Night time testing
Open forum after Field Trial Completed
18 Gardai, 6 Volunteers, 2 Supervisors
RCDT Field Trial
System 1
System 2
System 3
RCDT Field Trial-Operators
• Posed 18 questions
• Agree/Disagree and Comment
• Allowed for systems with and without a
Reader
• Main Goal: To determine if there was any
reason why the system on trial could not be
used.
RCDT Field Trial-Operator
• The system can be easily operated in daylight
conditions.
• The system be easily operated in night time
conditions.
• The tester can be easily stored on Garda person.
• The tester can be easily stored in the storage area of a
Garda motorcycle.
• The tester can be easily stored in the storage area of a
Garda car.
• When unpacking the test it was possible to do this
quickly by hand without the need for a tool such as a
scissors.
RCDT Field Trial-Operator
• Contamination was not possible when unpacking
the tester.
• The specimen was easy to collect.
• The indicator showing the sufficient sample was
clear and unambiguous.
• There were no hazards encountered at any stage
when using the device.
• There were no hygiene issues arising from use of
device.
• Lines were clear and easy to see.
RCDT Field Trial - Reader
•
•
•
•
The reader system was easy to use.
The results from the reader were easy to Interpret.
The reader can be stored on Garda person.
The reader can be stored in the storage area of a Garda
motorcycle.
• The reader can be stored in the storage area of a Garda
car.
• The cases offered were suitable for outdoor use (e.g.
Checkpoint).
• Any other comments
RCDT Field Trial-Subject
• Posed 6 Questions
• Agree/Disagree and Comment
RCDT Field Trial-Subject
• The instructions were adequate to enable you to
provide sufficient specimen.
• It was easy to provide a specimen using the device.
• There were no hazards encountered at any stage when
using the device.
• The device did not cause any reaction or irritation
when used.
• There was not anything unpleasant with the use of the
device.
• Any other comments
RCDT Field Trial-Result
• Results subject to ongoing tender process
• There was no reason why any of the systems
evaluated could not be used.
• There was a preferred system
• Collection time was a high priority
Roll Out
• Order (Lead Time)
• Re-evaluate (Ensure same performance as trial stock)
• Ongoing evaluation (Sampling and re-evaluation)
• Garda Training
• Legislation
Strategy Post Implementation
• Ongoing QC of device approved
• Action 124: Evaluate on an ongoing basis the
use of roadside drug screening devices.
Review
• Road Safety Strategy – Drug Driving
• Roadside Drug Testing Report
• Implementation
• Post Implementation
Aknowledgements
• An Garda Siochana (Superintendenat Aidan Reid,
Inspector John B. Kelly (Retired), Inspector Kieran
O’Connor)
• MBRS (Ms. Helen Kearns, Ms. Pauline Leavy (retired),
Prof. Denis Cusack, Orla Gogarty, Aisling Kennedy)
• Dept. of Transport, Tourism and Sport
• RSA
Thank you!
[email protected]